Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.
The defendant contends that the Supreme Court erred in denying his request to charge the jury that one of the People's witnesses was an accomplice as a matter of law, and that his testimony therefore required corroboration (see, CPL 60.22). Under the circumstances, the witness is considered an accomplice as a matter of law, and the jury should have been instructed accordingly (
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.