People v Alexander

Annotate this Case
People v Alexander 2017 NY Slip Op 08480 Decided on December 5, 2017 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on December 5, 2017
Richter, J.P., Manzanet-Daniels, Andrias, Kern, Singh, JJ.
5129 1013/12

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Yvette Alexander, Defendant-Appellant.



Seymour W. James, Jr., The Legal Aid Society, New York (Ronald Alfano of counsel), for appellant.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Stephen Kress of counsel), for respondent.



Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J. at mistrial; Daniel P. FitzGerald, J. at plea and sentencing), rendered September 22, 2014, convicting defendant of aggravated harassment in the second degree, and sentencing her to a conditional discharge, unanimously affirmed.

The court providently exercised its discretion when, after accepting a partial verdict acquitting defendant of another charge, it declared a mistrial as to the remaining charge based on an implied finding of manifest necessity. In this brief trial, the jury sent out notes indicating it was deadlocked on the count at issue, before and after the court delivered an Allen charge in accordance with defendant's wishes (see Matter of Rivera v Firetog, 11 NY3d 501 [2008], cert denied 556 US 1193 [2009]; People v Baptiste, 72 NY2d 356 [1988]; Matter of Plummer v Rothwax, 63 NY2d 243 [1984]). The court sufficiently inquired into the jury's inability to reach a verdict, and it properly considered but rejected alternatives to a mistrial.

We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining arguments.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: DECEMBER 5, 2017

CLERK



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.