People v. Mayo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mayo

270 A.D. 1032, 63 N.Y.S.2d 644, 1946 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5223

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

DecidedJune 17, 1946

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.D. 1032 (People v. Mayo) 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. Mayo, 270 A.D. 1032, 63 N.Y.S.2d 644, 1946 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5223 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the County Court of Kings County convicting him, as a second offender, of the crimes of burglary, in the second degree, assault in the second degree, and sodomy, for which he was sentenced to imprisonment on the burglary charge to twenty-five to thirty years; on the sodomy charge twenty-five to thirty years, and on the assault charge nine to ten years, all terms to run concurrently. Judgment affirmed. No opinion. Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur; Lewis, P. J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment of conviction and to dismiss the indictment on the ground that the identification of the defendant was not established beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the County Court of Kings County convicting him, as a second offender, of the crimes of burglary, in the second degree, assault in the second degree, and sodomy, for which he was sentenced to imprisonment on the burglary charge to twenty-five to thirty years; on the sodomy charge twenty-five to thirty years, and on the assault charge nine to ten years, all terms to run concurrently. Judgment affirmed. No opinion. Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur; Lewis, P. J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment of conviction and to dismiss the indictment on the ground that the identification of the defendant was not established beyond a reasonable doubt.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D. 1032, 63 N.Y.S.2d 644, 1946 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mayo-nyappdiv-1946.