People v. Faucetta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Faucetta

262 A.D. 778, 27 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5820

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

DecidedMay 26, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D. 778 (People v. Faucetta) 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. Faucetta, 262 A.D. 778, 27 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5820 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of the County Court of Queens County convicting defendant of the crimes of robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the first degree, assault in the first degree and burglary in the third degree, as second offenses, unanimously affirmed. The guilt of the defendant was so clearly and convincingly established that the errors wMch were committed may be disregarded. (Code Crim. Proc. § 542.) Of the five defendants convicted, only two are here on appeal. [See People v. Rozea, post, p. 778.1 In a ease where the guilt of a defendant was less clearly shown we would be required to reverse a judgment of conviction where, as here, the trial court persisted in making extraneous comments and purported witticisms and in propounding improper questions. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ.

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

Judgment of the County Court of Queens County convicting defendant of the crimes of robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the first degree, assault in the first degree and burglary in the third degree, as second offenses, unanimously affirmed. The guilt of the defendant was so clearly and convincingly established that the errors wMch were committed may be disregarded. (Code Crim. Proc. § 542.) Of the five defendants convicted, only two are here on appeal. [See People v. Rozea, post, p. 778.1 In a ease where the guilt of a defendant was less clearly shown we would be required to reverse a judgment of conviction where, as here, the trial court persisted in making extraneous comments and purported witticisms and in propounding improper questions. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D. 778, 27 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5820, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-faucetta-nyappdiv-1941.