People v. Rhodie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rhodie

54 A.D.2d 586, 386 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13949

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

DecidedSeptember 27, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 54 A.D.2d 586 (People v. Rhodie) 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. Rhodie, 54 A.D.2d 586, 386 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13949 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered November 27, 1973, convicting him of robbery in the first and second degrees and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and new trial ordered for the same reasons as are set forth in People v McGill (47 AD2d 961). (See People v Malloy, 22 NY2d 559, 567.) We note, however, that the [587]*587prosecutorial error in referring to defendant McGill’s prior youthful offender adjudication was probably harmless as regards the present appellant. Latham, Acting P. J., Margett, Rabin, Titone and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered November 27, 1973, convicting him of robbery in the first and second degrees and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and new trial ordered for the same reasons as are set forth in People v McGill (47 AD2d 961). (See People v Malloy, 22 NY2d 559, 567.) We note, however, that the [587]*587prosecutorial error in referring to defendant McGill’s prior youthful offender adjudication was probably harmless as regards the present appellant. Latham, Acting P. J., Margett, Rabin, Titone and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 586, 386 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13949, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rhodie-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack