People v. Grandis

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Grandis

188 N.E.2d 794, 12 N.Y.2d 946

DecidedJanuary 23, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 188 N.E.2d 794 (People v. Grandis) 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. Grandis, 188 N.E.2d 794, 12 N.Y.2d 946 (N.Y. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion for amendment of remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended to read as follows: Upon the appeal herein there was presented and necessarily passed upon the contention of defendants that [947]*947they were denied due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States on the ground that the jury had been coerced into a verdict. In respect to this contention, the Court of Appeals held that there was no such denial. Defendants further contended that evidence obtained from union books and records as a result of an alleged illegal search and seizure was in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution. In respect to this contention, the Court of Appeals held that there were no violations of any individual rights guaranteed to defendants by the Constitution. [See 12 N Y 2d 812.]

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

Motion for amendment of remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended to read as follows: Upon the appeal herein there was presented and necessarily passed upon the contention of defendants that [947]*947they were denied due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States on the ground that the jury had been coerced into a verdict. In respect to this contention, the Court of Appeals held that there was no such denial. Defendants further contended that evidence obtained from union books and records as a result of an alleged illegal search and seizure was in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution. In respect to this contention, the Court of Appeals held that there were no violations of any individual rights guaranteed to defendants by the Constitution. [See 12 N Y 2d 812.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 N.E.2d 794, 12 N.Y.2d 946, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-grandis-ny-1963.