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. Rashawn JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered March 8, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.
Defense counsel's request, made on a Friday morning, for an adjournment of jury deliberations on that day so that defendant could remain at Rikers Island to attend religious services was properly denied. Defendant was fully aware that the court intended to convene the jury for continued deliberations on Friday, based on discussions of the subject the prior evening. During those discussions, neither defendant nor his counsel made any objection, and defendant's counsel indicated that he saw no alternative. Only after defendant refused to appear the next day did counsel then request that the matter be adjourned over the weekend. The court, which had previously accommodated defendant's religious practices, properly denied that request because this was the second day of deliberations, the alternate jurors had been dismissed and adjourning deliberations until Monday would have caused serious problems with regard to the jury in general and several jurors in particular. Under these circumstances, a three-day adjournment would have substantially jeopardized the State's compelling interest in insuring a fair trial for both defendant and the People (see, People v. Rosemond, 270 A.D.2d 293, 704 N.Y.S.2d 111, lv. denied 95 N.Y.2d 803, 711 N.Y.S.2d 171, 733 N.E.2d 243; People v. Morgan, 265 A.D.2d 230, 231, 697 N.Y.S.2d 259, lv. denied 94 A.D.2d 905, 463 N.Y.S.2d 657; People v. Williams, 197 A.D.2d 401, 602 N.Y.S.2d 377, lv. denied 82 N.Y.2d 932, 610 N.Y.S.2d 184, 632 N.E.2d 494).
Accordingly, the court's ruling was justified (see, Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398, 403, 83 S.Ct. 1790, 10 L.Ed.2d 965).
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: June 04, 2002
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)