Relates to jury deliberations

This measure would amend section 310.30 of the Criminal Procedure Law to allow a trial judge, at the request of a deliberating jury, to provide the jury with a complete written copy of the court's charge. Previously, we have endorsed a proposal, not enacted into law, to allow a court to submit only portions of the court's charge. The present proposal differs in that it provides for the court's entire charge to be delivered to the jury upon request.

Sections 310.20 and 310.30 of the Criminal Procedure Law specify the materials that may be provided by the court to a deliberating jury, which include exhibits received in evidence as may be permitted by the court (CPL section 310.20(1)), a verdict sheet (CPL section 310.20(2)), a written list of the names of the witnesses whose testimony was presented during the trial (CPL section 310.20(3)) and, under certain circumstances and with the consent of the parties, copies of the text of a statute (CPL section 310.30).

Yet it is not uncommon for a deliberating jury to ask the trial judge to provide it with a copy of its charge, especially in complex cases. The Criminal Procedure Law, however, does not authorize the court to grant such a request. Indeed, the Court of Appeals has held that providing only portions of the court's charge over the objection of a party is improper because it would "convey the message that these (portions) are of particular importance," thus subordinating other portions of the charge (People if Owens, 69 NY2d 585, 591 (1987)). Although such concerns are not present where the entire charge is submitted to the jury, the Court subsequently held that the restrictive language of CPL 310.30 prohibits a court from distributing its entire charge to the jury (People v Johnson, 81 NY2d 980 (1993)).

The Supreme Court of the United States long ago held that it is not error to provide the jury with a written copy of the charge (Haupt v United States, 330 US 631, 643 (194.7)). Moreover, between 2003 and 2005, the Jury Trial Project, initiated by then Chief Judge Judith Kaye, conducted a year-long experiment in which participating judges from across New York State sat on 112 trials in which innovative jury trial practices were used. The Jury Trial Project concluded that jurors need assistance to do their jobs well, as reflected by jurors' own assessments of trial complexity. Jurors tended to view trials as being very complex, while judges presiding over the same cases viewed the trial as not at all complex. In criminal cases, where only 8% of judges viewed any particular criminal trial as very complex, nearly half the jurors thought of them as very complex (Final Report of the Committees of the jury Trial Project, New York State Unified Court System, 2005). The Jury Trial Project concluded, based on trials in which deliberating jurors were provided with a written copy of the judge's final charge, that written instructions can assist jurors in correctly fulfilling their responsibilities (id. at 32; see also Jury

Trial Innovations in New York State: Enhancing the Trial Process for All Participants: A Practical Guide for Trial Judges, New York State Unified Court System, 2009). A similar finding was made by the American Bar Association, which determined that a basic principle for a jury trial should be to provide each juror "with a written copy of instructions for use while the jury is being instructed and during deliberations" (American Bar Association Principles for juries and jury Trials, Principal 14B, (2005)).

This measure would amend CPL section 310.30 to authorize a trial court to submit its entire charge to a deliberating jury upon their request. Consent of the parties is not required. However, counsel for both parties would be permitted to examine the written instructions and be heard thereon, and the documents would be marked as a court exhibit prior to their submission to the jury. Also, on consent of the parties to only provide a limited portion of the charge, the court would be bound by the parties' agreement to provide only that portion agreed to by the attorneys.

This act shall take effect immediately, and shall apply to all trials commenced on or after such effective date.

Legislative History: None. New proposal.