People v. Anderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Anderson

33 A.D.2d 715, 305 N.Y.S.2d 9, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2873

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 33 A.D.2d 715 (People v. Anderson) 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 v. Anderson, 33 A.D.2d 715, 305 N.Y.S.2d 9, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum by the Court.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chenango County, rendered May 13, 1969, adjudging defendant to be a youthful offender. While a stipulation was entered into by defendant’s counsel that a separate hearing upon the question of the admission of the confession was not necessary, the voluntariness of the statement was placed in issue and the trial court erred in admittting it before -defendant was afforded an opportunity to present evidence upon that issue. Such error cannot be deemed insubstantial. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Cooke, JJ., concur in memorandum by the court.

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

Memorandum by the Court.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chenango County, rendered May 13, 1969, adjudging defendant to be a youthful offender. While a stipulation was entered into by defendant’s counsel that a separate hearing upon the question of the admission of the confession was not necessary, the voluntariness of the statement was placed in issue and the trial court erred in admittting it before -defendant was afforded an opportunity to present evidence upon that issue. Such error cannot be deemed insubstantial. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Cooke, JJ., concur in memorandum by the court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 715, 305 N.Y.S.2d 9, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-anderson-nyappdiv-1969.