Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ralph MILLER, a/k/a Miller Ralph, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.), rendered September 11, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted assault in the first degree (2 counts) and reckless endangerment in the first degree, and, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to four concurrent terms of 3 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence that defendant fired a loaded pistol at the victims. The court properly discharged a sworn juror, over defense objection, where the juror had concealed the fact that he was required to appear in Criminal Court during the instant trial to answer a pending misdemeanor charge being prosecuted by the same District Attorney's Office, which charge he was angry about and intended to contest. After a thorough inquiry, the court reasonably concluded that this juror possessed a state of mind that would have influenced his deliberations and prevented him from rendering an impartial verdict (People v. Buford, 69 N.Y.2d 290, 299, 514 N.Y.S.2d 191, 506 N.E.2d 901).
The prosecutor's improper comment in violation of defendant's right to remain silent did not deprive defendant of a fair trial, in view of the court's curative instructions and the overwhelming evidence of guilt (People v. Crociata, 123 A.D.2d 781, 507 N.Y.S.2d 255; People v. Moore, 82 A.D.2d 972, 440 N.Y.S.2d 418).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: February 03, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)