People v. Scalise

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Scalise

42 N.E.2d 494, 288 N.Y. 220, 1942 N.Y. LEXIS 1030

DecidedJune 4, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 42 N.E.2d 494 (People v. Scalise) 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. Scalise, 42 N.E.2d 494, 288 N.Y. 220, 1942 N.Y. LEXIS 1030 (N.Y. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

There was sufficient proof to justify conviction on the 58th count charging grand larceny by embezzlement. As to the four forgery counts, however, which charge violations of subdivision 1 of the first part of section 889 of the Penal Law, the evidence is insufficient since there is no showing of a falsification of any record by alteration, erasure, obliteration or destruction. (People v. Underhill, 142 N. Y. 38; People v. Anderson, 239 *222 N. Y. 534.) The judgment of the Appellate Division should be modified so as to provide that the judgment of conviction as to the 6th, 13th, 19th and 45th counts of the indictment be reversed and those counts dismissed, otherwise affirmed.

The judgments should be modified in accordance with this opinion and as so modified affirmed.

Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ., concur.

Judgment accordingly.

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

Per Curiam.

There was sufficient proof to justify conviction on the 58th count charging grand larceny by embezzlement. As to the four forgery counts, however, which charge violations of subdivision 1 of the first part of section 889 of the Penal Law, the evidence is insufficient since there is no showing of a falsification of any record by alteration, erasure, obliteration or destruction. (People v. Underhill, 142 N. Y. 38; People v. Anderson, 239 *222 N. Y. 534.) The judgment of the Appellate Division should be modified so as to provide that the judgment of conviction as to the 6th, 13th, 19th and 45th counts of the indictment be reversed and those counts dismissed, otherwise affirmed.

The judgments should be modified in accordance with this opinion and as so modified affirmed.

Lehman, Ch. J., Loughran, Finch, Rippey, Lewis, Conway and Desmond, JJ., concur.

Judgment accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 N.E.2d 494, 288 N.Y. 220, 1942 N.Y. LEXIS 1030, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-scalise-ny-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack