People v. Banks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Banks

40 A.D.2d 833, 337 N.Y.S.2d 368, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3481

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.2d 833 (People v. Banks) 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. Banks, 40 A.D.2d 833, 337 N.Y.S.2d 368, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3481 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County, rendered April 7, 1971, convicting her of manslaughter in the second degree (first count) and possession of a weapon as a misdemeanor (second cout), upon a jury verdict, and sentencing her to an indeterminate prison term not to exceed seven years on the first count and a term of one year on the second count, the sentences to run concurrently. Judgment reversed, on the law and in the interests of justice, and new trial ordered* The trial was permeated by heated exchanges between counsel most of which were brought on by the improper conduct of the prosecutor. Vigorous prosecution is not only permissible, but commendable; nevertheless, the desire to obtain a conviction does not warrant the injunction of extraneous and prejudicial comment into the proceedings. Under the circumstances of this case we feel that the jury may well have been prejudiced to defendant’s detriment by the prosecutor’s conduct. Rabin, P. J;, Latham, Shapiro, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County, rendered April 7, 1971, convicting her of manslaughter in the second degree (first count) and possession of a weapon as a misdemeanor (second cout), upon a jury verdict, and sentencing her to an indeterminate prison term not to exceed seven years on the first count and a term of one year on the second count, the sentences to run concurrently. Judgment reversed, on the law and in the interests of justice, and new trial ordered* The trial was permeated by heated exchanges between counsel most of which were brought on by the improper conduct of the prosecutor. Vigorous prosecution is not only permissible, but commendable; nevertheless, the desire to obtain a conviction does not warrant the injunction of extraneous and prejudicial comment into the proceedings. Under the circumstances of this case we feel that the jury may well have been prejudiced to defendant’s detriment by the prosecutor’s conduct. Rabin, P. J;, Latham, Shapiro, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.2d 833, 337 N.Y.S.2d 368, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3481, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-banks-nyappdiv-1972.