People v. Kelly, 566 N.E.2d 1159 (N.Y. 1990). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Kelly, 566 N.E.2d 1159 (N.Y. 1990). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
64 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: People v. Williams (nyappdiv, 2012-12-28)
Treatment trajectory · 1991 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1991 2008 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Williams
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Under these circumstances, the error requires reversal of the judgment with respect to both the conviction under that count and the conviction of grand larceny in the fourth degree as a lesser included offense under count four of the indictment because, despite the absence of any improper annotation in relation thereto, count four is “factually related” to count two (People v Kelly, 76 NY2d 1013, 1015 [1990]; see People v Williams, 237 AD2d 982, 983 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 866 [1997]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Williams
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Under these circumstances, the error requires reversal of the judgment with respect to both the conviction under that count and the conviction of grand larceny in the fourth degree as a lesser included offense under count four of the indictment because, despite the absence of any improper annotation in relation thereto, count four is “factually related” to count two (People v Kelly, 76 NY2d 1013, 1015 [1990]; see People v Williams, 237 AD2d 982, 983 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 866 [1997]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Martell
NY · 1998 · confidence medium
Interpreting these provisions, we have previously held that, absent defendant’s consent, it is error for the court to supply a jury with any written material containing statutory elements or terms of the charged offenses, and that such error cannot be considered harmless (see, People v Damiano, 87 NY2d 477, 480 ; People v Spivey, 81 NY2d 356, 361-362 ; People v Johnson, 81 NY2d 980, 981-982 ; People v Taylor, 76 NY2d 873, 874; People v Kelly, 76 NY2d 1013, 1014; People v Nimmons, 72 NY2d 830, 831 ; People v Sanders, 70 NY2d 837, 838 ; see also, People v Sotomayer, 79 NY2d 1029, 1030 ; but se…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Baghai-Kermani
NY · 1994 · confidence medium
In this regard, it is noteworthy that, apart from the ex *533 tremely weak linkage supplied by the repetition factor, the counts were not "factually related” in any meaningful way (see, People Kelly, supra, at 1015; People v Cohen, 50 NY2d 908, 911 ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Damiano
N.Y. App. Div. · 1994 · confidence medium
Depravity and recklessness are elements of each of the crimes charged under count one of the indictment and it has been held repeatedly that a trial court may not, absent the consent of the parties, "give the jury a verdict sheet that, in addition to listing the counts, also lists some of the statutory elements of the counts” (People v Spivey, 81 NY2d 356, 361 ; see, People v Sotomayer, 79 NY2d 1029, 1030 ; People v Kelly, 76 NY2d 1013, 1014-1015).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Damiano (2×)
NY · 1996 · signal: see also · confidence medium
As any attempt to evaluate the impact of these annotations is necessarily predicated on speculation about the thought processes of the jurors, a harmless error analysis is inappropriate ( see , Klein v Harris , 667 F.2d 274, 291 ; see also , People v Kelly , 76 NY2d, at 1014, supra ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York, Appellant,
v.
Ross Kelly, Respondent
New York Court of Appeals.
Dec 27, 1990.
566 N.E.2d 1159
1990 N.Y. LEXIS 4492
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Robert Morgenthau, District Attorney (Alexei Schacht of counsel), for appellant., John Gemmill and Philip L. Weinstein for respondent.
Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa Concur.
Cited by 34 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant’s conviction for robbery in the first degree was properly reversed. It was error for the trial court to give the jury a verdict sheet, over defendant’s objection, that, in addition to listing the charged crimes, also listed some of the robbery counts’ statutory elements (People v Taylor, 76 NY2d 873; People v Nimmons, 72 NY2d 830). "Since such an error creates a risk that the jury’s deliberative process will be unfairly skewed it puts in serious question the reliability of the ultimate guilt determination (see, People v Owens, 69 NY2d 585, 590-591).” (People v Taylor, supra, at 874.) Further, contrary to the People’s contention, defendant’s conviction for[*1015] criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree was also properly reversed, even though the verdict sheet did not list any of that crime’s elements. Since the weapon possession count was factually related to the robbery count, it too may have been affected by the improper notations on the verdict sheet (see, People v Cohen, 50 NY2d 908, 911).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.