People v. Miller

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Miller

175 N.E.2d 457, 9 N.Y.2d 839

DecidedApril 20, 1961

StatusPublished

This text of 175 N.E.2d 457 (People v. Miller) 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. Miller, 175 N.E.2d 457, 9 N.Y.2d 839 (N.Y. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of conviction affirmed; no opinion.-

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke and Foster. Judge Froessel dissents and votes to reverse on the ground that, upon this record and in light of defendant’s written statement, the trial court’s failure to charge the jury that it might find that the underlying felony had been abandoned was prejudicial error (People v. Walsh, 262 N. Y. 140; People v. Smith, 232 N. Y. 239; People v. Brown, 5 A D 2d 819; see, also, People v. Koerber, 244 N. Y. 147, 154; People v. Van Zandt, 224 N. Y. 354); accordingly, a new trial should be ordered.

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

Judgment of conviction affirmed; no opinion.-

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke and Foster. Judge Froessel dissents and votes to reverse on the ground that, upon this record and in light of defendant’s written statement, the trial court’s failure to charge the jury that it might find that the underlying felony had been abandoned was prejudicial error (People v. Walsh, 262 N. Y. 140; People v. Smith, 232 N. Y. 239; People v. Brown, 5 A D 2d 819; see, also, People v. Koerber, 244 N. Y. 147, 154; People v. Van Zandt, 224 N. Y. 354); accordingly, a new trial should be ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 N.E.2d 457, 9 N.Y.2d 839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-miller-ny-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack