People v. Onody

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Onody

73 N.E.2d 35, 296 N.Y. 305

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 17, 1947

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 73 N.E.2d 35 (People v. Onody) 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. Onody, 73 N.E.2d 35, 296 N.Y. 305 (N.Y. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

There was ample proof to sustain the defendant’s conviction under the second count based on subdivision 2 of section 483 of the Penal Law for having placed a child of eleven years in such a situation that her morals were likely to be impaired. The defendant contends that such a conclusion is in conflict with People v. Lindloff (259 App. Div. 749). We do not think the statute can be so narrowly construed as to exclude from its terms the indecent treatment to which the child was subjected in this case, and if the decision in the Lindloff case (supra) is to the contrary we disapprove it. The defendant in this ease was also charged in the third and fourth counts with assault in the third degree. These counts were sufficient and were amply sustained by the evidence (People v. Gibson, 232 N. Y. 458).

The first count of the information charged a violation of subdivision 1- of section 483 of the Penal Law alleging that the defendant caused the morals of the child ‘ ‘ to become depraved ’ ’. There was no evidence that the child’s morals actually did become depraved, and accordingly the evidence was not sufficient to warrant conviction under this count (People v. Hopkins, 20App. Div. 438). The sentence was authorized and there is no reason for remitting the case to Special Sessions for review thereof (Correction Law, § 203, subds. [a], [b]).

The judgment should be affirmed.

Lotjghban, Oh. J., Lewis, Conway, Desmond, Thacheb, Dyb and Fuld, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

There was ample proof to sustain the defendant’s conviction under the second count based on subdivision 2 of section 483 of the Penal Law for having placed a child of eleven years in such a situation that her morals were likely to be impaired. The defendant contends that such a conclusion is in conflict with People v. Lindloff (259 App. Div. 749). We do not think the statute can be so narrowly construed as to exclude from its terms the indecent treatment to which the child was subjected in this case, and if the decision in the Lindloff case (supra) is to the contrary we disapprove it. The defendant in this ease was also charged in the third and fourth counts with assault in the third degree. These counts were sufficient and were amply sustained by the evidence (People v. Gibson, 232 N. Y. 458).

The first count of the information charged a violation of subdivision 1- of section 483 of the Penal Law alleging that the defendant caused the morals of the child ‘ ‘ to become depraved ’ ’. There was no evidence that the child’s morals actually did become depraved, and accordingly the evidence was not sufficient to warrant conviction under this count (People v. Hopkins, 20App. Div. 438). The sentence was authorized and there is no reason for remitting the case to Special Sessions for review thereof (Correction Law, § 203, subds. [a], [b]).

The judgment should be affirmed.

Lotjghban, Oh. J., Lewis, Conway, Desmond, Thacheb, Dyb and Fuld, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 N.E.2d 35, 296 N.Y. 305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-onody-ny-1947.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack