People v. Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Davis

282 A.D. 962, 125 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5577

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

DecidedNovember 23, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 282 A.D. 962 (People v. Davis) 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. Davis, 282 A.D. 962, 125 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5577 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the County Court, Kings County, convicting him of the crime of manslaughter in the first degree, [963]*963and imposing sentence, and from orders of said court denying his motions to set aside the verdict and for a new trial. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and new trial ordered. No separate appeals lie from the orders, which have been reviewed on the appeal from the judgment of conviction. The summation of the assistant district attorney to the jury was inflammatory and prejudicial to the defendant. The issues of fact presented for the jury’s determination were sharply disputed. Under the circumstances, the interests of justice require that a new trial be had. Adel, Acting P. J., Wenzel, Mac-Crate, Schmidt and Beldock, JJ., concur.

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

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the County Court, Kings County, convicting him of the crime of manslaughter in the first degree, [963]*963and imposing sentence, and from orders of said court denying his motions to set aside the verdict and for a new trial. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and new trial ordered. No separate appeals lie from the orders, which have been reviewed on the appeal from the judgment of conviction. The summation of the assistant district attorney to the jury was inflammatory and prejudicial to the defendant. The issues of fact presented for the jury’s determination were sharply disputed. Under the circumstances, the interests of justice require that a new trial be had. Adel, Acting P. J., Wenzel, Mac-Crate, Schmidt and Beldock, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D. 962, 125 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5577, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-davis-nyappdiv-1953.