[Download] "People State New York v. Robert Ernest Brown" by Supreme Court of New York # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: People State New York v. Robert Ernest Brown
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 18, 1958
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 65 KB
Description
Judgment of conviction reversed, on the law, and in the exercise of discretion, and a new trial directed. There are a number
of matters suggested by the court's charge to the jury which might have properly been made the subject of request or exception
by defendant's counsel. But no such request or exception was made. Normally, the court will not permit a defendant on appeal
to take advantage of error or omission in the absence of request or exception (Code Crim. Pro., § 420-a; People v. Feld, 305
N. Y. 322, 332; People v. Lee, 300 N. Y. 422; cf. People v. Caverio, 1 N.Y.2d 657, dissenting opinion by FULD, J.), but where
an omission from the charge, or a statement in the charge, may have contributed materially and improperly to the jury's finding,
and there is danger, therefore, that defendant was not properly convicted, a new trial should be directed in the interests
of justice. (Code Crim. Pro., § 527; People v. Van Zandt, 224 N. Y. 354.) Such danger is found in the present case. Important
elements in the proof were the admissions made by defendant. These admissions, insofar as they were not culpatory, were not
relevant to any issue of self-defense but rather to a defense of accidental killing or excusable homicide. Nevertheless, there
was no instruction to the jury that they might so view the evidence, namely, that defendant knifed the deceased, as he admitted,
but, as he also claimed in his extra-judicial admissions, only accidentally and with no intent to use the knife upon the person
of the deceased. Request or not, defendant was entitled to such a charge. The court also charged on the weight of evidence
of flight, and said it could be an important circumstance pointing to the guilt of the defendant. As a matter of fact, evidence
of flight even if found to have occurred may have no precise weight or value assigned to it.It is rarely entitled to the great
significance which the court attached to it in its charge (People v. Reddy, 261 N. Y. 479, 486; cf. People v. Leyra, 1 N.Y.2d
199, 208-210). Concur - Botein, P.J., Breitel, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.