People v. Cummings, Sharpe, Accobacco, Kligerman

59 N.E.2d 437, 293 N.Y. 841, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 2260
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 22, 1944
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 N.E.2d 437 (People v. Cummings, Sharpe, Accobacco, Kligerman) 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.

Bluebook
People v. Cummings, Sharpe, Accobacco, Kligerman, 59 N.E.2d 437, 293 N.Y. 841, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 2260 (N.Y. 1944).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon the record before us we conclude that the trial court erred when it charged as a matter of law that the witnesses Kivowitz and Arnold were not accomplices of the defendants in the crime of concealing and withholding stolen property in' New York County. That inquiry, we think, was one of fact for the jury. The judgments should be reversed and a new trial ordered.

Concur: Lehman, Ch. J., Loughkan, Rippey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thacheb, JJ.

Judgments reversed, etc.

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

Related

State v. McKnight
281 P.2d 816 (Montana Supreme Court, 1955)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 N.E.2d 437, 293 N.Y. 841, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 2260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cummings-sharpe-accobacco-kligerman-ny-1944.