People v. Reatz

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Reatz

208 N.E.2d 461, 16 N.Y.2d 541, 260 N.Y.S.2d 654, 1965 N.Y. LEXIS 1351

DecidedMay 20, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 208 N.E.2d 461 (People v. Reatz) 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. Reatz, 208 N.E.2d 461, 16 N.Y.2d 541, 260 N.Y.S.2d 654, 1965 N.Y. LEXIS 1351 (N.Y. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment modified to the extent of directing a hearing on the issue of the voluntariness of defendant’s confession and, as so modified, affirmed. Case remitted to Supreme Court, Kings County, for such hearing (People v. Huntley, 15 N Y 2d 72). The record before us fails to establish defendant’s claim that the District Attorney’s opening consisted only of a reading of the indictment. No opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan.

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

Judgment modified to the extent of directing a hearing on the issue of the voluntariness of defendant’s confession and, as so modified, affirmed. Case remitted to Supreme Court, Kings County, for such hearing (People v. Huntley, 15 N Y 2d 72). The record before us fails to establish defendant’s claim that the District Attorney’s opening consisted only of a reading of the indictment. No opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 N.E.2d 461, 16 N.Y.2d 541, 260 N.Y.S.2d 654, 1965 N.Y. LEXIS 1351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-reatz-ny-1965.