People v. Mills

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mills

41 A.D.2d 915, 343 N.Y.S.2d 552, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4505

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

DecidedMay 10, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 41 A.D.2d 915 (People v. Mills) 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. Mills, 41 A.D.2d 915, 343 N.Y.S.2d 552, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4505 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of conviction, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered January 18, 1972, unanimously affirmed. It should be noted, however, that the language of the Court of Appeals as set forth in People v. Fitzgerald (156 N. Y. 253, 266), has essential validity and should be followed: “In the trial of a criminal case it can never be necessary to add anything to the plain and simple language of the statute on this subject. The fact that the accused does not testify in his own behalf cannot be permitted to create any presumption against him. That is the plain mandate of the law, and the force of the proposition should not be weakened and destroyed with the jury by qualifying words.” Concur — Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Lane and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

Judgment of conviction, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered January 18, 1972, unanimously affirmed. It should be noted, however, that the language of the Court of Appeals as set forth in People v. Fitzgerald (156 N. Y. 253, 266), has essential validity and should be followed: “In the trial of a criminal case it can never be necessary to add anything to the plain and simple language of the statute on this subject. The fact that the accused does not testify in his own behalf cannot be permitted to create any presumption against him. That is the plain mandate of the law, and the force of the proposition should not be weakened and destroyed with the jury by qualifying words.” Concur — Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Lane and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.2d 915, 343 N.Y.S.2d 552, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mills-nyappdiv-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack