People v. Croes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Croes

260 A.D. 939, 23 N.Y.S.2d 283, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5549

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 260 A.D. 939 (People v. Croes) 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. Croes, 260 A.D. 939, 23 N.Y.S.2d 283, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5549 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of the County Court, Kings County, convicting defendant of the crime of rape in the second degree, affirmed. The defendant’s guilt was clearly established. Assuming that there had been intercourse on two separate days, the corroboration covers both. There is no basis for the claim that the [940]*940“ Court animatedly presented the People’s case but omitted the defendant’s case.” While the court in reviewing the evidence made some misstatements, they were inconsequential and did not affect the defendant’s substantial rights; and as there was no exception to the charge, the error, if any, may be disregarded under section 542 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Lazansky, P. J., Johnston and Close, JJ., concur; Hagarty and Adel, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse the judgment and to order a new trial, with the following memorandum: There was no evidence of corroboration of the complaining witness’ testimony. The fact that the defendant paid for a pregnancy test is not corroboration of an act of intercourse on the day alleged in the indictment, because the complaining witness also testified to the happening of such an act on another day. (People v. Robertson, 88 App. Div. 198; People v. Farina, 134 id. 110.)

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

Judgment of the County Court, Kings County, convicting defendant of the crime of rape in the second degree, affirmed. The defendant’s guilt was clearly established. Assuming that there had been intercourse on two separate days, the corroboration covers both. There is no basis for the claim that the [940]*940“ Court animatedly presented the People’s case but omitted the defendant’s case.” While the court in reviewing the evidence made some misstatements, they were inconsequential and did not affect the defendant’s substantial rights; and as there was no exception to the charge, the error, if any, may be disregarded under section 542 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Lazansky, P. J., Johnston and Close, JJ., concur; Hagarty and Adel, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse the judgment and to order a new trial, with the following memorandum: There was no evidence of corroboration of the complaining witness’ testimony. The fact that the defendant paid for a pregnancy test is not corroboration of an act of intercourse on the day alleged in the indictment, because the complaining witness also testified to the happening of such an act on another day. (People v. Robertson, 88 App. Div. 198; People v. Farina, 134 id. 110.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D. 939, 23 N.Y.S.2d 283, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5549, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-croes-nyappdiv-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack