People v. Scerbo
This text of 2 A.D.2d 849 (People v. Scerbo) 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.
Opinion
There is no evidence in the record that the writing received in evidence, though not shown to he in the handwriting of the defendant, represented the names of race horses or wagers on horse racing, or a proper basis for the inference, offered by the People’s witness, of gambling or book-making. Nevertheless, in these circumstances, the trial court should have permitted the district attorney to qualify the police officer as an expert on book-making (Dougherty v. Milliken, 163 N. Y. 527, 533; McCormick on Evidence, p. 28; 7 Wigmore on Evidence [3d ed.], § 1925). Judgment [850]*850reversed, the fine remitted and a new trial ordered. Concur — Rabin,. Cox and Bergan, JJ.; Botein, J. P., and Valente, J., dissent and vote to affirm.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 A.D.2d 849, 156 N.Y.S.2d 180, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-scerbo-nyappdiv-1956.