AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES CARRINGTON, Appellant.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see, CPL 470.15).

However, because the defendant was denied his right to a public trial, a new trial is ordered ( see, US Const 6th Amend; Civil Rights Law § 12; Judiciary Law § 4). The testimony of the undercover officer at the hearing held pursuant to People v Hinton ( 31 N.Y.2d 71, cert denied 410 U.S. 911) was insufficient to satisfy the criteria of People v. Martinez ( 82 N.Y.2d 436). Further, the closure was broader than necessary, as the court failed to indicate a basis for excluding the defendant's father during the undercover officer's testimony ( see, People v. Kin Kan, 78 N.Y.2d 54; People v. Gutierez, 86 N.Y.2d 817; People v Davis, 210 A.D.2d 345). Rosenblatt, J.P., Miller, Ritter and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. CARRINGTON
(Oct 16, 1995)