People v. Landers, Exum

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Landers, Exum

191 N.E. 616, 264 N.Y. 665, 1934 N.Y. LEXIS 1697

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 22, 1934

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 191 N.E. 616 (People v. Landers, Exum) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Landers, Exum, 191 N.E. 616, 264 N.Y. 665, 1934 N.Y. LEXIS 1697 (N.Y. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion for reargument denied and motion to amend the remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and when returned it will be amended by including therein the following: “ Upon the argument of this motion counsel for the appellant Landers, presented and argued the following point, viz.: ‘ The refusal of the Trial Judge to permit the defendant to be heard in his own defense after the jury returned from taking its view was a denial of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.’ The contention of the appellant was considered and was explicitly overruled by the court (Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 291 U. S. 97, 121; Cumberland Coal Co. v. Board, 284 U. S. 23, 24).” (See 264 N. Y. 119.)

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

Motion for reargument denied and motion to amend the remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and when returned it will be amended by including therein the following: “ Upon the argument of this motion counsel for the appellant Landers, presented and argued the following point, viz.: ‘ The refusal of the Trial Judge to permit the defendant to be heard in his own defense after the jury returned from taking its view was a denial of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.’ The contention of the appellant was considered and was explicitly overruled by the court (Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 291 U. S. 97, 121; Cumberland Coal Co. v. Board, 284 U. S. 23, 24).” (See 264 N. Y. 119.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 N.E. 616, 264 N.Y. 665, 1934 N.Y. LEXIS 1697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-landers-exum-ny-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack