People v. Rudish
This text of 63 N.E.2d 77 (People v. Rudish) 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.
Opinion
Upon this reargument we assume that the evidence against Eudish was sufficient and that as to him no error of law was committed upon the trial. Nevertheless, since the Supreme Court of the United States directed a new trial as to Malinski because one of his confessions was inadmissible, the defendant Eudish should, in the interest of justice, receive a new trial with that confession excluded.
The judgment of conviction should be reversed and a new trial ordered-
Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Desmond, Thacher and Dye, JJ., concur; Lewis and Conway, JJ., dissent on the ground that the decision on this reargument should await the retrial of People v. Malinski.
Judgment of conviction reversed, etc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
63 N.E.2d 77, 294 N.Y. 500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rudish-ny-1945.