People v. Jackson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jackson

20 A.D.2d 918, 249 N.Y.S.2d 645, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4008

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

DecidedApril 20, 1964

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 20 A.D.2d 918 (People v. Jackson) 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. Jackson, 20 A.D.2d 918, 249 N.Y.S.2d 645, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4008 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered March 23, 1962 after a jury trial, convicting him of selling and possession of narcotic drugs (P’enal Law, § 1751, subd. 1; § 1751-a, subd. 1), and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Although it was improper for the detective on cross-examination to testify that he recognized as defendant’s trade-mark the tinfoil covering of the packages which defendant had handed to another witness (because from such testimony it could have been inferred that defendant had been guilty of other similar crimes), we are of the opinion that the error should be disregarded for the following reasons: (1) the error was not that of the District Attorney; (2) the Trial Judge gave prompt, clear and adequate instruction to the jury to disregard the detective’s remark and directed the witness not to volunteer testimony; (3) the error was confined to this single, isolated instance; and (4) the error could not have prejudiced the jury in light of the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt (Code Grim. Pro., § 542; People V. Broady, 5 N Y 2d 500; People v. Maries, 6 N Y 2d 67). The other errors claimed are without merit. Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, 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, Suffolk County, rendered March 23, 1962 after a jury trial, convicting him of selling and possession of narcotic drugs (P’enal Law, § 1751, subd. 1; § 1751-a, subd. 1), and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Although it was improper for the detective on cross-examination to testify that he recognized as defendant’s trade-mark the tinfoil covering of the packages which defendant had handed to another witness (because from such testimony it could have been inferred that defendant had been guilty of other similar crimes), we are of the opinion that the error should be disregarded for the following reasons: (1) the error was not that of the District Attorney; (2) the Trial Judge gave prompt, clear and adequate instruction to the jury to disregard the detective’s remark and directed the witness not to volunteer testimony; (3) the error was confined to this single, isolated instance; and (4) the error could not have prejudiced the jury in light of the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt (Code Grim. Pro., § 542; People V. Broady, 5 N Y 2d 500; People v. Maries, 6 N Y 2d 67). The other errors claimed are without merit. Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 918, 249 N.Y.S.2d 645, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jackson-nyappdiv-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack