People v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Smith

252 A.D. 877, 299 N.Y.S. 947, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6653

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

DecidedNovember 19, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 252 A.D. 877 (People v. Smith) 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. Smith, 252 A.D. 877, 299 N.Y.S. 947, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6653 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, convicting the defendant of the crime of assault in the third degree, reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial ordered. In our opinion, a new trial should be granted in the interests of justice in order that the court have before it the record of the proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court wherein [878]*878the complainant pleaded guilty to some undetermined offense. If the offense was disorderly conduct, as indicated, rather than “ smoking a cigarette,” as the complainant testified, such plea of guilt constituted an admission affecting the credibility of complainant as it would be inconsistent with his testimony at the trial as to his conduct on the train. Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.., concur.

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

Judgment of the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, convicting the defendant of the crime of assault in the third degree, reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial ordered. In our opinion, a new trial should be granted in the interests of justice in order that the court have before it the record of the proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court wherein [878]*878the complainant pleaded guilty to some undetermined offense. If the offense was disorderly conduct, as indicated, rather than “ smoking a cigarette,” as the complainant testified, such plea of guilt constituted an admission affecting the credibility of complainant as it would be inconsistent with his testimony at the trial as to his conduct on the train. Hagarty, Davis, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ.., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 A.D. 877, 299 N.Y.S. 947, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6653, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-smith-nyappdiv-1937.