New York Consolidated Laws
N.Y. Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 (2026)
Jury deliberation; request for information
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NY-LEGnysenate.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 310.30 Jury deliberation; request for information. At any time during its deliberation, the jury may request the court for further instruction or information with respect to the law, with respect to the content or substance of any trial evidence, or with respect to any other matter pertinent to the jury's consideration of the case. Upon such a request, the court must direct that the jury be returned to the courtroom and, after notice to both the people and counsel for the defendant, and in the presence of the defendant, must give such requested information or instruction as the court deems proper. With the consent of the parties and upon the request of the jury for further instruction with respect to a statute, the court may also give to the jury copies of the text of any statute which, in its discretion, the court deems proper.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2021 · leading case: The People v. Terrance L. Mack, 55 N.E.3d 1041 (NY 2016).
The People v. Terrance L. Mack, 55 N.E.3d 1041 (NY 2016). “: Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 imposes two responsibilities on trial courts upon receipt of a substantive note from a deliberating jury: the court must provide counsel with meaningful notice of the content of the note, and the court must provide a meaningful response to the…”
People v. Morrison, 148 A.D.3d 1707 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). “Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 provides that a deliberating jury “may request the court for further instruction or *1710 information with respect to the law, with respect to the content or substance of any trial evidence, or with respect to any other matter pertinent to the…”
People v. Petrizzo, 2020 NY Slip Op 3251 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020). “"Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 imposes two responsibilities on trial courts upon receipt of a substantive note from a deliberating jury: the court must provide counsel with meaningful notice of the content of the note, and the court must provide a meaningful response to the…”
Mills v. Girdich, 614 F. Supp. 2d 365 (W.D.N.Y. 2009). “New York’s Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 provides that when responding to a jury question, “the [trial] court ‘must give such requested information or instruction as the court deems proper.”
People v. Thomas, 2017 NY Slip Op 497 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). ““Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 imposes two responsibilities on trial courts upon receipt of a substantive note from a deliberating jury: the court must provide counsel with meaningful notice of the content of the note, and the court must provide a meaningful response to the…”
Schramm v. Irvin, 2 F. Supp. 2d 339 (W.D.N.Y. 1998). “A separate column on the form was provided for a finding of “guilty” or “not guilty.”
Morrison, William, People v. (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). “Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 provides that a deliberating jury “may request the court for further instruction or information with respect to the law, with respect to the content or substance of any trial evidence, or with respect to any other matter pertinent to the jury’s…”
People v. Morrison, 148 A.D.3d 1707 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). “Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 provides that a deliberating jury “may request the court for further instruction or *1710 information with respect to the law, with respect to the content or substance of any trial evidence, or with respect to any other matter pertinent to the…”
Stewart Jr. v. State of New York (E.D.N.Y 2021). “Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 establishes the procedure by which a trial court must respond to jury notes.”
People v. Gedeon, 2018 NY Slip Op 4751 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018). “"Criminal Procedure Law § 310.30 imposes two responsibilities on trial courts upon receipt of a substantive note from a deliberating jury: the court must provide counsel with meaningful notice of the content of the note, and the court must provide a meaningful response to the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.