People v. Arata
This text of 173 N.E. 868 (People v. Arata) 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.
Opinion
The affidavits proving or tending to prove that contradictory statements were made by the witness Woodbury, while not sufficient in themselves to require a new trial, were, none the less, of such importance that the cause of justice would be promoted by causing Woodbury to be produced as a witness and subjected to the test of cross-examination.
Following the practice in People v. Shilitano (215 N. Y. 715), the determination of the appeal will be withheld until the fall session of the court to the end that an *566 opportunity may be given to the defendant to renew his motions for a new trial and an opportunity given to the trial judge to require the production of witnesses before him.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
173 N.E. 868, 254 N.Y. 565, 1930 N.Y. LEXIS 1165, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-arata-ny-1930.