New York’s highest court on Tuesday upheld a first-degree murder conviction built on a trial transcript so corrupted by a court reporter’s “blah blah blah,” “omitted” and “untranscribable” entries that the judges branded it “utterly inexcusable” — yet not fatal to the verdict.
The unanimous Court of Appeals decision holds that a reconstruction hearing—using testimony from the trial judge, lawyers, court clerks, and the judge’s notes—can cure a defective record and preserve a defendant’s right to appeal, unless the defendant shows such a hearing would be futile. People v Meyers, 236 AD3d 1499, 1500 [4th Dept 2025])
Joseph A. Meyers was convicted of murder, arson, fraud, and conspiracy in the February 2016 killing of his neighbor, David O’Dell, whose body was found in his burning home. Meyers and his wife, Iryn, quickly became suspects. Two months earlier, Iryn had bought a remainder interest in O’Dell’s home, moved into his basement, and taken out a life insurance policy on him shortly before the fire. Video and cellphone data showed the couple repeatedly traveling to and from O’Dell’s home the night of the fire.
A jury found Meyers guilty of one count of first-degree murder, one count of second-degree murder, two counts of first-degree arson, three counts of falsifying business records, one count of attempted insurance fraud and one count of conspiracy. He was sentenced to 23 years to life.
On appeal, Meyers’ counsel learned that the trial’s main stenographer had failed to record large portions of the proceedings, instead typing “blah blah blah,” “(omitted),” “(untranscribable)” or random characters. Missing were three full days of jury selection, the opening statements, the day of jury deliberations and verdict, and most of the day covering the charge conference, summations, and jury charge. Parts of witness testimony were also mistranscribed.
Instead of reversing outright, the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, put the appeal on hold and ordered a full-blown reconstruction hearing. Over four days, the Supreme Court took testimony from the trial judge, his confidential law clerk, the prosecutors, Meyers’ defense lawyers, and two court clerks, and reviewed 124 pages of the judge’s trial notes, the verdict sheet, and other key exhibits. With the Steuben County district attorney recused, a special prosecutor took the reins. Armed with that record, the Fourth Department ultimately affirmed the conviction.
Chief Judge Wilson framed the appeal around two questions: whether the Appellate Division properly ordered reconstruction instead of summary reversal, and whether the reconstructed record adequately protected Meyers’ appellate rights. The court answered yes to both.
A defendant has a “fundamental right to appellate review of a criminal conviction,” Wilson wrote, but every case begins with a presumption of regularity. The loss of a stenographic record “standing by itself, will not rebut that presumption” absent prejudice, and a defendant seeking summary reversal carries the “burden to establish that a reconstruction hearing would be futile.” Meyers could not meet that burden, the court found, given the short interval between trial and hearing and the full participation of the original players, including his own trial attorneys.
The court drew a sharp line, where summary reversal made sense because everything was stacked against reconstruction: the entire transcript was missing, the trial judge had died, 23 years had gone by, and the defendant didn’t speak English. Here, by contrast, most of the trial was transcribed, and the remaining witnesses were able to reconstruct the missing pieces. People v Rivera, 39 NY2d 519, 522 [1976])
Wilson noted that Meyers never identified any appealable issue he was unable to raise because of the defects, and that much of the garbled material was still understandable. In one portion of the preliminary jury instructions, the opinion said, the meaning was clear despite interruptions: “A trial jury is composed of 12 people. In addition to the 12 jurors, we also, blah, blah, sworn in as a trial juror will serve as the jury’s foreperson.”
The court also rejected Meyers’ due process challenges. The reconstruction court had told defense counsel that if a needed exhibit surfaced, counsel should object and the court would address it then. Counsel never did so and declined the prosecution’s offer to review its files.
At trial, the court found no due process violation in the prosecution’s warning that Meyers’ fire expert and his attorneys risked indictment because the expert inspected O’Dell’s woodstove without a private investigator’s license. The court reasoned that counsel could have litigated the People’s preclusion motion and sought appellate review but instead chose to withdraw the witness. The evidence of guilt, Wilson wrote, was “overwhelming.”
Judges Rivera, Garcia, Singas, Cannataro, Halligan and Mackey concurred. Judge Troutman took no part.
