Case ID: ad3d_121/html/1023-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Miguel Rojas, Appellant.
    [993 NYS2d 783]
   Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Aloise, J.), rendered January 4, 2012, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.

The defendant and his codefendant, Sebastian Giraldo, were tried together and were each convicted of two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. For the reasons set forth in this Court’s decision and order entitled People v Giraldo (116 AD3d 711, 712 [2014]), the Supreme Court’s mischaracterization of the contents of a particular jury note deprived defense counsel of prior meaningful notice of the contents of the note and an opportunity to suggest appropriate responses in accordance with CPL 310.30 and People v O’Rama (78 NY2d 270 [1991]). Accordingly, a new trial is required based on the Supreme Court’s failure to comply with CPL 310.30 in accordance with the procedure set forth in People v O’Rama (see People v Giraldo, 116 AD3d at 711-712).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit.

Skelos, J.P, Dickerson, Maltese and LaSalle, JJ., concur.