People v. Botwin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Botwin

241 A.D. 527, 272 N.Y.S. 878, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8294

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 21, 1934·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In the circumstances disclosed in the record, the application of the defendant for an adjournment upon the ground of engagement of counsel should have been granted. The defendant was charged with giving a false financial statement in violation of the provisions of section 1293-b of the Penal Law. The charge was one which peculiarly entitled the defendant to be represented by counsel familiar with the case in order that the defense might be fully and fairly developed and presente!.

The judgment should, therefore, be reversed and a new trial ordered.

Present — Finch, P. J., Merrell, Martin, O’Malley and Untermyer, JJ.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered.

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

Per Curiam.

In the circumstances disclosed in the record, the application of the defendant for an adjournment upon the ground of engagement of counsel should have been granted. The defendant was charged with giving a false financial statement in violation of the provisions of section 1293-b of the Penal Law. The charge was one which peculiarly entitled the defendant to be represented by counsel familiar with the case in order that the defense might be fully and fairly developed and presente!.

The judgment should, therefore, be reversed and a new trial ordered.

Present — Finch, P. J., Merrell, Martin, O’Malley and Untermyer, JJ.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered.

People v. Botwin, 241 A.D. 527, 272 N.Y.S. 878, 1934 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8294 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

241 A.D. 527 (People v. Botwin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related