People v. . Holzman

134 N.E. 569, 232 N.Y. 553, 1921 N.Y. LEXIS 585
New York Court of Appeals·Decided December 13, 1921·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The record in this case fails to disclose facts sufficient to justify a conclusion that the defendant made or had in his possession tools under circumstances evincing an intent to use or employ, or allow the same to *554 be used or employed, in the commission of a crime, or that he had knowledge that the said tools were intended to be' so used. " '

The judgments should be reversed and a new .trial granted. - .

His cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ., concur - Pound, J.,-absent. Judgments reversed, etc.

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

People v. . Holzman, 134 N.E. 569, 232 N.Y. 553, 1921 N.Y. LEXIS 585 (N.Y. 1921).

134 N.E. 569 (People v. . Holzman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Pantoja (Luis)
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017
People v. Perez
7 A.D.2d 633 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1958)