People v. Sabatelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sabatelli

24 A.D.2d 760, 263 N.Y.S.2d 550, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3322

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

DecidedOctober 11, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 760 (People v. Sabatelli) 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. Sabatelli, 24 A.D.2d 760, 263 N.Y.S.2d 550, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3322 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

By order of this court, dated May 14, 1965, defendant appears for reargument of an appeal (People v. Sabatelli, 22 A D 2d 762) which resulted in the unanimous affirmance of a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered Hovember 15, 1963 after a jury trial, convicting defendant of robbery in the first degree and imposing sentence upon him as a second felony offender. Judgment reversed in the interests of justice and a new trial granted. We have ordered a new trial for defendant’s alleged accomplice (People v. Duffy, 23 A D 2d 699) on the ground that the admission'into evidence of an unsigned statement of the alleged accomplice was an error. As the statement implicates the defendant, he must also be accorded a new trial (People v. Donovan, 13 N Y 2d 148, 154). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Brennan, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

By order of this court, dated May 14, 1965, defendant appears for reargument of an appeal (People v. Sabatelli, 22 A D 2d 762) which resulted in the unanimous affirmance of a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered Hovember 15, 1963 after a jury trial, convicting defendant of robbery in the first degree and imposing sentence upon him as a second felony offender. Judgment reversed in the interests of justice and a new trial granted. We have ordered a new trial for defendant’s alleged accomplice (People v. Duffy, 23 A D 2d 699) on the ground that the admission'into evidence of an unsigned statement of the alleged accomplice was an error. As the statement implicates the defendant, he must also be accorded a new trial (People v. Donovan, 13 N Y 2d 148, 154). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Brennan, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 760, 263 N.Y.S.2d 550, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sabatelli-nyappdiv-1965.