People v. Phelps

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Phelps

189 A.D. 775, 38 N.Y. Crim. 204, 179 N.Y.S. 289, 1919 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4756

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

DecidedDecember 12, 1919

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 189 A.D. 775 (People v. Phelps) 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. Phelps, 189 A.D. 775, 38 N.Y. Crim. 204, 179 N.Y.S. 289, 1919 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4756 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Rich, J.:

The evidence before the magistrate was sufficient to warrant the conviction of the defendant of the crime charged against her, and a careful reading of the testimony, which it is unnecessary to quote, leads to the conclusion that the learned county judge was in error in finding that the guilt of defendant was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

The reversal is based upon another ground also. The county judge was of the opinion that in order to sustain a conviction under subdivision 4 of section 887 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it was incumbent upon the People to “ establish that the defendant was a common prostitute or night walker, that she solicited to the annoyance of the [776]*776inhabitants or passersby, and that she was there in a public place for the purpose of prostitution.” This was a mistaken view of the law. The proof established that the defendant offered to commit prostitution, and, this proof was all that was requisite to a conviction. The defendant was convicted upon sufficient evidence, and the order of the County Court must be reversed.

The order of the County Court of Kings county is reversed and the judgment of conviction in the Magistrate’s Court affirmed, and defendant remanded to custody.

Jenks, P. J., Putnam, Blackmar and Jay cox, JJ., concurred.

Order of the County Court of Kings county reversed, judgment of conviction in the Magistrate’s Court affirmed, and defendant remanded to custody.

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

Rich, J.:

The evidence before the magistrate was sufficient to warrant the conviction of the defendant of the crime charged against her, and a careful reading of the testimony, which it is unnecessary to quote, leads to the conclusion that the learned county judge was in error in finding that the guilt of defendant was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

The reversal is based upon another ground also. The county judge was of the opinion that in order to sustain a conviction under subdivision 4 of section 887 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it was incumbent upon the People to “ establish that the defendant was a common prostitute or night walker, that she solicited to the annoyance of the [776]*776inhabitants or passersby, and that she was there in a public place for the purpose of prostitution.” This was a mistaken view of the law. The proof established that the defendant offered to commit prostitution, and, this proof was all that was requisite to a conviction. The defendant was convicted upon sufficient evidence, and the order of the County Court must be reversed.

The order of the County Court of Kings county is reversed and the judgment of conviction in the Magistrate’s Court affirmed, and defendant remanded to custody.

Jenks, P. J., Putnam, Blackmar and Jay cox, JJ., concurred.

Order of the County Court of Kings county reversed, judgment of conviction in the Magistrate’s Court affirmed, and defendant remanded to custody.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 A.D. 775, 38 N.Y. Crim. 204, 179 N.Y.S. 289, 1919 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4756, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-phelps-nyappdiv-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack