Home/New York Court of Appeals/People v. Rudish

People v. Rudish

63 N.E.2d 77, 294 N.Y. 500
New York Court of Appeals·Decided July 19, 1945·Published·Cited by 14 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

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

People v. Rudish, 63 N.E.2d 77, 294 N.Y. 500 (N.Y. 1945).

63 N.E.2d 77 (People v. Rudish) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Wheatman
34 A.D.2d 3 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1970)
People v. Burd
238 N.E.2d 746 (New York Court of Appeals, 1968)
People v. Cender
219 N.E.2d 200 (New York Court of Appeals, 1966)
People v. Aranda
407 P.2d 265 (California Supreme Court, 1965)
People v. Donovan
193 N.E.2d 628 (New York Court of Appeals, 1963)
People v. Waterman
175 N.E.2d 445 (New York Court of Appeals, 1961)
People v. Caminito
4 A.D.2d 697 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1957)
Stein v. New York
346 U.S. 156 (Supreme Court, 1953)
People v. Abel
273 A.D. 1034 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1948)
People v. Indovino
269 A.D. 949 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1945)