People v. Ernest M. J.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ernest M. J.

42 A.D.2d 717, 345 N.Y.S.2d 936, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3955

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

DecidedJuly 2, 1973

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 42 A.D.2d 717 (People v. Ernest M. J.) 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. Ernest M. J., 42 A.D.2d 717, 345 N.Y.S.2d 936, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3955 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered October 26, 1972, adjudicating him to be a youthful offender, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence upon him of five months in the Nassau County Jail. Judgment affirmed. In our [718]*718opinion, there was a departure from proper practice in the denial of defendant’s motion ¡to exclude from the courtroom a People’s witness, a detective, until he himself would be called to testify. However, since it is not shown that defendant was prejudiced by the presence of this witness in the courtroom, the denial of the motion will not be deemed reversible error (People v. Felder, 39 A D 2d 373, 379-380). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Shapiro and Benjamin, 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, Nassau County, rendered October 26, 1972, adjudicating him to be a youthful offender, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence upon him of five months in the Nassau County Jail. Judgment affirmed. In our [718]*718opinion, there was a departure from proper practice in the denial of defendant’s motion ¡to exclude from the courtroom a People’s witness, a detective, until he himself would be called to testify. However, since it is not shown that defendant was prejudiced by the presence of this witness in the courtroom, the denial of the motion will not be deemed reversible error (People v. Felder, 39 A D 2d 373, 379-380). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Shapiro and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A.D.2d 717, 345 N.Y.S.2d 936, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ernest-m-j-nyappdiv-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack