Some of Justice Joseph A. McBride's reversals

 

Below is a table of some of Justice Joseph A. McBride's (Chenango County Supreme Court, New York) reversals when he was a District Attorney and in his current capacity as Supreme Court Justice.

This is "competency" of a judge who is allowed by law to take away your property, your liberty and the custody of your children.

By the way, New York State law does not provide for any safeguards for competence of judges when they are elected to the bench - no exam for the position of a judge, as they have in other countries.

You simply need (1) a heartbeat;  (2) a law license (which will never be revoked for a prosecutor, no matter what he does - a separate Commission for Prosecutorial Conduct, a fairly toothless entity, was created in New York specifically because appellate divisions refused to discipline prosecutors;  and (3) your own vote when you run unopposed.

The catastrophic results below is the consequence of such laws.

Where McBride was a prosecutor, the decisions reversed were of the presiding judge, not of McBride himself - but the judge is siding with McBride's prosecutorial misconduct, which is what led to reversals.

Where reversals are of McBride as a judge - McBride's own mistakes are self-evident.

The summaries of the cases below are short - you can read the entire cases for yourself by clicking on the links.

Year	Role	Case	Specific Appellate Finding (What Was Done Incorrectly)	Result / Gravity
2006	Prosecutor	People v. Wlasiuk, 32 A.D.3d 674	Introduced extensive prior bad act (Molineux) evidence without proper analysis; admitted hearsay (victim’s writings) without foundation; allowed expert to act as conduit for third-party report; engaged in summation conduct including expressing personal views, calling testimony “lies,” and maligning defense counsel	Severe – conviction reversed; new trial
2006	Prosecutor	People v. Van Deusen, 7 N.Y.3d 744	Failed to ensure defendant was advised of mandatory postrelease supervision before plea; plea deemed not knowing and voluntary	Severe – conviction reversed (Court of Appeals)
2006	Prosecutor	People v. Dalton, 2006 NY Slip Op 01410	Charged criminal solicitation where it was legally incidental to the underlying offense; drafted counts covering multiple acts over long periods, making them duplicitous	Severe – multiple counts dismissed
2007	Prosecutor	People v. Bruning, 2007 NY Slip Op 09444	Allowed sentencing beyond agreed plea range after defendant expressed intent to appeal; plea terms not honored or properly conditioned	Severe – sentence reversed; remitted
2008	Prosecutor	People v. Littebrant, 2008 NY Slip Op 08208	Secured conviction under statutory theory (physical helplessness) not supported by evidence (victim not unable to communicate unwillingness)	Severe- count dismissed
2011	Prosecutor	People v. Elwood, 2011 NY Slip Op 00289	Obtained conviction on a charge fully subsumed within another offense (same weapon element used for both counts)	Severe– count dismissed
2017	Prosecutor	People v. Rose, 2017 NY Slip Op 08217	Argued legality of police escalation based on proximity and behavior alone; court found facts insufficient to meet De Bour thresholds for inquiry and pursuit	Severe – suppression affirmed
2022	Judge	107 S. Albany St. v. Scott, 211 A.D.3d 1380	Dismissed claim based on absence of guaranty despite claim being for breach of fiduciary duty; accepted unpreserved standing argument	Severe – reversed; remitted
2024	Judge	Cancilla v. O’Rourke, 232 A.D.3d 1175	Failed to apply proper summary judgment standards; permitted reliance on improper procedural mechanisms to resolve disputed issues	Severe – reversed in part
2024	Judge	Katleski v. Cazenovia Golf Club, 225 A.D.3d 1030	Denied summary judgment despite dispositive legal doctrine (assumption of risk) resolving claim as a matter of law	Severe – reversed; complaint dismissed
2024	Judge	Mormile v. Marshall, 233 A.D.3d 1270	Failed to follow mandatory jury selection rules (peremptory challenge sequence); structured verdict sheet so jury did not reach required legal questions	Severe – reversal; new trial
2024	Judge	Szypula v. Szypula, 42 N.Y.3d 620	Classified property based on origin rather than statutory rule; failed to apply commingling doctrine under Domestic Relations Law	Severe – reversed (Court of Appeals)

---