People v. Baker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Baker

25 A.D.2d 945, 270 N.Y.S.2d 547, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4210

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

DecidedMay 19, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D.2d 945 (People v. Baker) 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. Baker, 25 A.D.2d 945, 270 N.Y.S.2d 547, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4210 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed and new trial granted. Memorandum: Appellant has been convicted following a jury trial of burglary, third degree and petit larceny. One of the factual issues litigated at the trial was whether defendant had broken into a house or was found therein after having unlawfully entered. Defendant made certain oral admissions to a police officer. Following a pretrial hearing the court held that certain statements so made were involuntary and not admissible at the trial. Other oral statements, however, were held to have been voluntarily made and admissible. These were clearly inculpatory on the issue of unlawful entry although they may have been exculpatory on the issue as to whether or not defendant broke into the house. The trial court, however, failed to submit to the jury the issue of voluntariness of these oral admissions. This was error that requires a new trial. (People v. Huntley, 15 N Y 2d 72, 78; People v. Stewart, 25 A D 2d 483). (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court convicting defendant of burglary, third degree, and petit larceny.)

Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henryj Del Vecehio and Marsh, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed and new trial granted. Memorandum: Appellant has been convicted following a jury trial of burglary, third degree and petit larceny. One of the factual issues litigated at the trial was whether defendant had broken into a house or was found therein after having unlawfully entered. Defendant made certain oral admissions to a police officer. Following a pretrial hearing the court held that certain statements so made were involuntary and not admissible at the trial. Other oral statements, however, were held to have been voluntarily made and admissible. These were clearly inculpatory on the issue of unlawful entry although they may have been exculpatory on the issue as to whether or not defendant broke into the house. The trial court, however, failed to submit to the jury the issue of voluntariness of these oral admissions. This was error that requires a new trial. (People v. Huntley, 15 N Y 2d 72, 78; People v. Stewart, 25 A D 2d 483). (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court convicting defendant of burglary, third degree, and petit larceny.)

Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Henryj Del Vecehio and Marsh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 945, 270 N.Y.S.2d 547, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-baker-nyappdiv-1966.