People v. Umali

Summary

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division, holding that the temporary ban on attorney‑client communication during a multi‑day recess did not violate the defendant's right to counsel because it was promptly lifted, and that the jury instructions, taken as a whole, correctly placed the burden of proof on the People despite a single misstated phrase. The Court also found the exclusion of the prior‑consistent statement testimony harmless.