After Second Appeal, Panel Upsets Assault Conviction

, New York Law Journal

   | 1 Comments

A judge's acquiescence to a defendant who, against advice of counsel, opposed allowing the jury to consider a lesser offense, requires the conviction to be reversed, an upstate appellate court has found.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Anonymous

    Judge Broderick was correct. A defendant, especially one facing a parole or probation revocation has the right to roll the dice on his own life. This is more true if he believes the top charge to be too thin for conviction. It‘s his damned life, not the attorney‘s or the appellate court‘s. What if he was proceeding pro se? Do we infantilize his determination then and give him a do-over?

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202655723258

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.