People v. Jarrels

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jarrels

38 A.D.2d 962, 332 N.Y.S.2d 597, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5116

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

DecidedMarch 20, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.2d 962 (People v. Jarrels) 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. Jarrels, 38 A.D.2d 962, 332 N.Y.S.2d 597, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5116 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 28, 1969, which denied the application without a hearing, and, (2) as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the same court, dated August 28, 1969, as, on reargument, adhered to the original decision. Appeal from order dated May 28, 1969 dismissed as academic. That order was superseded by the order dated August 28, 1969. Order dated August 28, 1969 affirmed insofar as appealed from. We have examined the record of defendant’s trial with reference to the testimony of Detective Modesto and find that he did not testify to the confession of an alleged “ buddy ” as claimed by defendant. Munder, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Shapiro, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 28, 1969, which denied the application without a hearing, and, (2) as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the same court, dated August 28, 1969, as, on reargument, adhered to the original decision. Appeal from order dated May 28, 1969 dismissed as academic. That order was superseded by the order dated August 28, 1969. Order dated August 28, 1969 affirmed insofar as appealed from. We have examined the record of defendant’s trial with reference to the testimony of Detective Modesto and find that he did not testify to the confession of an alleged “ buddy ” as claimed by defendant. Munder, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Shapiro, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.2d 962, 332 N.Y.S.2d 597, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jarrels-nyappdiv-1972.