Conviction Reversed & New Trial Ordered Due to Judge’s Participation & Interference at Trial
Following a jury trial, Mr. Coleman was convicted of assault and related counts. On appeal, he argued that he did not receive a fair trial due to the trial judge’s improper interference and participation in the proceedings.
Although unpreserved, the Second Department reached the issue in the interest of justice, reversed the conviction, and ordered a new trial. The Court noted that although a trial judge may clarify testimony and facilitate the progress of the trial, the judge may not “take on the function or appearance of an advocate.” The Court found that the trial judge in Mr. Coleman’s case did precisely that by asking numerous leading questions of a prosecution witness who was a paramedic, “guided the prosecution at length in its questioning of the paramedic,” “assisted the prosecution in laying a foundation for the admission of evidence,” “repeatedly engaged in lengthy colloquies with various prosecution witnesses” “in order to provide evidence favorable to the prosecution,” and “improperly took on the function and appearance of an advocate.” Because the trial judge’s “conduct left the impression that its opinion favored the credibility of the People’s witnesses and the merits of the People’s case,” Mr. Coleman was deprived of a fair trial.
Zachory Nowosadzki represented Mr. Coleman