People ex rel. Stephenson v. Martin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Stephenson v. Martin

48 N.Y.S. 1112

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 31, 1897

StatusPublished

This text of 48 N.Y.S. 1112 (People ex rel. Stephenson v. Martin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People ex rel. Stephenson v. Martin, 48 N.Y.S. 1112 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1897).

Pincite

Opinion

VAN BRUNT, P. J.

Upon an examination of the record in this case, it appears not only that the errors which resulted in the reversal of the criminal conviction of the relator are contained therein, but others even more aggravated. In the determination of this case the commissioners do not seem to have paid the slightest regard to evidence. The relator has been found guilty on charges in respect to which there was not the slightest scintilla of proof, and we are unable to see .upon the record, as it is presented to us, how the corporation counsel could have taken any other or different position in respect to this proceeding than he has done. The proceedings should be annulled, and the relator reinstated, with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

VAN BRUNT, P. J.

Upon an examination of the record in this case, it appears not only that the errors which resulted in the reversal of the criminal conviction of the relator are contained therein, but others even more aggravated. In the determination of this case the commissioners do not seem to have paid the slightest regard to evidence. The relator has been found guilty on charges in respect to which there was not the slightest scintilla of proof, and we are unable to see .upon the record, as it is presented to us, how the corporation counsel could have taken any other or different position in respect to this proceeding than he has done. The proceedings should be annulled, and the relator reinstated, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 N.Y.S. 1112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-stephenson-v-martin-nyappdiv-1897.