Home/New York Court of Appeals/People v. Andrus

People v. Andrus

346 N.E.2d 820, 38 N.Y.2d 925, 382 N.Y.S.2d 981, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2365
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 26, 1976
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 346 N.E.2d 820 (People v. Andrus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Andrus, 346 N.E.2d 820, 38 N.Y.2d 925, 382 N.Y.S.2d 981, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2365 (N.Y. 1976).

Opinion

Memorandum. The order should be affirmed.

Of the three elements required to be corroborated under the rigid requirements of the rape statute (former Penal Law, § 130.15), which prevailed at the time the defendant was convicted (see People v Linzy, 31 NY2d 99, 100-101), two of them, penetration and identity, were conceded. The third, "force or lack of consent” (at p 101) was supported by a legally competent, though equivocal, admission sufficient to create a question of fact (United States v Picarelli, 148 F2d 997, 998).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed in memorandum.

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

Related

People v. Eisenman
351 N.E.2d 429 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
346 N.E.2d 820, 38 N.Y.2d 925, 382 N.Y.S.2d 981, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-andrus-ny-1976.