People v. James

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. James

47 A.D.2d 931, 367 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9383

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

DecidedApril 21, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.D.2d 931 (People v. James) 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. James, 47 A.D.2d 931, 367 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9383 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered January 2, 1974, convicting him of criminally selling a dangerous drug in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial ordered. Appellant did not raise any questions of fact and none have been considered. The prosecutor was permitted to ask questions of defendant on cross-examination relating to the possession of drugs by a female companion at a time subsequent to the commission of the crime charged. This was basic error. In addition, it should be noted that the charges against the female companion had been dismissed. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Brennan and Shapiro, JJ., conur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered January 2, 1974, convicting him of criminally selling a dangerous drug in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial ordered. Appellant did not raise any questions of fact and none have been considered. The prosecutor was permitted to ask questions of defendant on cross-examination relating to the possession of drugs by a female companion at a time subsequent to the commission of the crime charged. This was basic error. In addition, it should be noted that the charges against the female companion had been dismissed. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Brennan and Shapiro, JJ., conur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.2d 931, 367 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-james-nyappdiv-1975.