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, etc., respondent, v. Khaldoun HUSSARI, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D'Emic, J.), rendered October 31, 2001, convicting him of criminal contempt in the first degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. By decision and order dated March 22, 2004, the appeal was held in abeyance and the matter was remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, to hear and report on whether the defendant was competent to stand trial.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered; and it is further,
ORDERED that on the court's own motion, the “report” of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated December 22, 2004, is rejected.
When “a record cannot be reconstructed because of the lapse of time, the unavailability of the participants in the proceeding or some similar circumstance, there must be a reversal” (People v. Smith, 248 A.D.2d 568, 670 N.Y.S.2d 46, quoting People v. Harrison, 85 N.Y.2d 794, 796, 628 N.Y.S.2d 939, 652 N.E.2d 638). Here, at the reconstruction hearing ordered by this court (People v. Hussari, 5 A.D.3d 697, 774 N.Y.S.2d 725), the People conceded that there were no contemporaneous psychiatric reports of the defendant's mental condition at the time of trial to determine his competency to stand trial. Since reconstruction of the defendant's mental capacity to stand trial is not possible in this case, we reverse the judgment and order a new trial (see People v. Peterson, 40 N.Y.2d 1014, 391 N.Y.S.2d 530, 359 N.E.2d 1325; People v. Torres, 162 A.D.2d 482, 556 N.Y.S.2d 401).
The Supreme Court erred in determining that the defendant was not competent to stand trial following its finding that reconstruction was not possible. The court should only have reported to this court its finding that reconstruction was not possible. Accordingly, the Supreme Court's “report” dated December 22, 2004, stating that the defendant was not competent to stand trial must be vacated.
The defendant's remaining contentions on appeal are without merit.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 11, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)