People v. Pentz

New York Court of Common Pleas

People v. Pentz

1 Wheel. Cr. Cas. 240

DecidedMarch 15, 1823

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Wheel. Cr. Cas. 240 (People v. Pentz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Pentz, 1 Wheel. Cr. Cas. 240 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1823).

Pincite

Opinion

The Recorder held, that a witness on being asked a question totally irrelevant, is not bound to answer ; but having once answered, the party inquiring might produce contradictory testimony.

The Recorder directed the jury to convict the defendant, according to the testimony of his own witness, and recommended that affidavits in mitigation, should be laid before the Court. The jury convicted him. Hedley having stated to the Court his intention of commencing a civil action, the sentence of the defendant was suspended.

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

The Recorder held, that a witness on being asked a question totally irrelevant, is not bound to answer ; but having once answered, the party inquiring might produce contradictory testimony.

The Recorder directed the jury to convict the defendant, according to the testimony of his own witness, and recommended that affidavits in mitigation, should be laid before the Court. The jury convicted him. Hedley having stated to the Court his intention of commencing a civil action, the sentence of the defendant was suspended.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wheel. Cr. Cas. 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pentz-nyctcompl-1823.