People v. Longaro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Longaro

269 A.D. 787, 55 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3853

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

DecidedMay 21, 1945

StatusPublished

This text of 269 A.D. 787 (People v. Longaro) 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. Longaro, 269 A.D. 787, 55 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3853 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

The defendants were convicted before a city magistrate, holding a Court of Special Sessions of the City of Hew York, Borough of Brooklyn, of the crime of violating section 986 of the Penal Law, in having unlawfully engaged in book-making. The only evidence to indicate the guilt of the defendants was that when arrested they were seated at a table in a vacant store, and in front of each was a blank pad, on top of which were three loose sheets of paper hearing names of horses, amounts wagered, and initials of players. They were not the owners or lessees of the premises; they were not seen taking any money or bets; nor were they seen doing any writing or holding [788]*788any conversation with those present. There is no evidence as to any telephone on the premises, and the writing on the scratch sheet and the slips is not identified as being the handwriting of the defendants. In our opinion the record is insufficient to establish the guilt of the defendants beyond a reasonable doubt. The judgments of conviction are reversed on the law and facts, the complaints dismissed and the fines remitted. (People v. Richardson, 287 N. Y. 563; People v. Marra, 289 N. Y. 703; People v. Scibelli, 267 App. Div. 883; People v. Leichus, 265 App. Div. 932.) Close, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ., concur.

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

The defendants were convicted before a city magistrate, holding a Court of Special Sessions of the City of Hew York, Borough of Brooklyn, of the crime of violating section 986 of the Penal Law, in having unlawfully engaged in book-making. The only evidence to indicate the guilt of the defendants was that when arrested they were seated at a table in a vacant store, and in front of each was a blank pad, on top of which were three loose sheets of paper hearing names of horses, amounts wagered, and initials of players. They were not the owners or lessees of the premises; they were not seen taking any money or bets; nor were they seen doing any writing or holding [788]*788any conversation with those present. There is no evidence as to any telephone on the premises, and the writing on the scratch sheet and the slips is not identified as being the handwriting of the defendants. In our opinion the record is insufficient to establish the guilt of the defendants beyond a reasonable doubt. The judgments of conviction are reversed on the law and facts, the complaints dismissed and the fines remitted. (People v. Richardson, 287 N. Y. 563; People v. Marra, 289 N. Y. 703; People v. Scibelli, 267 App. Div. 883; People v. Leichus, 265 App. Div. 932.) Close, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D. 787, 55 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3853, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-longaro-nyappdiv-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack