From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Woods

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1968
30 A.D.2d 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Opinion

June 3, 1968


Judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County, rendered November 23, 1966, modified, on the law and the facts and in the interests of justice, by striking out the sentences on the second, third and fourth counts of the indictment and reducing the conviction on each of said counts from robbery in the first degree to robbery in the second degree. As so modified, judgment affirmed and case remitted to the County Court, Dutchess County, for resentence on said counts. In our opinion, the first verdict of the jury, which found defendant guilty of robbery in the second degree but, nevertheless, found defendant guilty of conspiracy as a felony, was a consistent verdict ( People v. Tavormina, 257 N.Y. 84; People v. Montgomery, 21 A.D.2d 904). Therefore, it was error to charge the jury to reconsider their verdict. Defendant's failure to take exception to the charge to reconsider the verdict is overlooked in the interests of justice. Beldock, P.J., Christ, Brennan, Hopkins and Martuscello, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Woods

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1968
30 A.D.2d 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)
Case details for

People v. Woods

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES SAMUEL WOODS…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 3, 1968

Citations

30 A.D.2d 667 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)

Citing Cases

People v. Whitfield

When a defendant fails to call the court's attention to an erroneous charge by stating his objection on the…

People v. Di Paolo

The absence of timely objections or exceptions may be overlooked and does not deprive the defendant of…