People v. Holland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Holland

244 A.D. 287, 279 N.Y.S. 372

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 3, 1935·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are satisfied from the evidence that the defendant’s alleged oral confession to the police officer, which was essential to sustain the People’s case, was procured by violence and intimidation. Furthermore, it was error to deny the defendant’s counsel the right to examine the police officer concerning the circumstances under which the alleged confession was secured before receiving it in evidence. (People v. Rogers, 192 N. Y. 331; People v. Brasch, 193 id. 46.)

The judgment of conviction should be reversed and a new trial ordered.

Present — Martin, P. J., Merrell, McAvoy, O’Malley and Untermyer, JJ.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered.

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

Per Curiam.

We are satisfied from the evidence that the defendant’s alleged oral confession to the police officer, which was essential to sustain the People’s case, was procured by violence and intimidation. Furthermore, it was error to deny the defendant’s counsel the right to examine the police officer concerning the circumstances under which the alleged confession was secured before receiving it in evidence. (People v. Rogers, 192 N. Y. 331; People v. Brasch, 193 id. 46.)

The judgment of conviction should be reversed and a new trial ordered.

Present — Martin, P. J., Merrell, McAvoy, O’Malley and Untermyer, JJ.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered.

People v. Holland, 244 A.D. 287, 279 N.Y.S. 372 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

244 A.D. 287 (People v. Holland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related