People v. Karney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Karney

23 A.D.2d 924, 258 N.Y.S.2d 879, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4289

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

DecidedMay 6, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 A.D.2d 924 (People v. Karney) 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. Karney, 23 A.D.2d 924, 258 N.Y.S.2d 879, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4289 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon this appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County, rendered upon a verdict, convicting defendant of the crime of carnal abuse of a child (Penal Law, § 483-a), the only proof offered by the prosecution to establish defendant's guilt consisted of defendant’s alleged confession and the testimony of the complaining witness, a seven-year-old girl. Her testimony was merely that defendant “ touched ” her once, but where was shown, in the language of the trial transcript, by “indicating”; and since the record does not disclose nor even suggest the part of her body so indicated, the confession stood alone and her testimony did not constitute the “ additional proof that the crime charged [had] been committed ”, which is prerequisite to conviction. (Code Grim. Pro., § 395; People v. Belcher, 299 N. Y. 321.) Upon the basis of evidence developed upon the trial, defendant moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that the mother of the complaining witness was present before the Grand Jury when the witness testified. The indictment should have been set aside. (Code Grim. Pro., § 313, subd. 2; People v. Minet, 296 N. Y. 315; People v. La Brecque, 198 Mise. 470.) Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and indictment dismissed. Settle order on notice. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Upon this appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County, rendered upon a verdict, convicting defendant of the crime of carnal abuse of a child (Penal Law, § 483-a), the only proof offered by the prosecution to establish defendant's guilt consisted of defendant’s alleged confession and the testimony of the complaining witness, a seven-year-old girl. Her testimony was merely that defendant “ touched ” her once, but where was shown, in the language of the trial transcript, by “indicating”; and since the record does not disclose nor even suggest the part of her body so indicated, the confession stood alone and her testimony did not constitute the “ additional proof that the crime charged [had] been committed ”, which is prerequisite to conviction. (Code Grim. Pro., § 395; People v. Belcher, 299 N. Y. 321.) Upon the basis of evidence developed upon the trial, defendant moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that the mother of the complaining witness was present before the Grand Jury when the witness testified. The indictment should have been set aside. (Code Grim. Pro., § 313, subd. 2; People v. Minet, 296 N. Y. 315; People v. La Brecque, 198 Mise. 470.) Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and indictment dismissed. Settle order on notice. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 924, 258 N.Y.S.2d 879, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-karney-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack