People v. Stummer
337 N.E.2d 128, 37 N.Y.2d 717, 374 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 2089
Opinion
Memorandum. While there was not compliance with the requirement that the defendant and his attorney be given notice of the time and place where prospective jurors were to be drawn (22 NYCRR 30.5 [c]), absent a showing or even a claim of prejudice, the order of the County Court should be affirmed. (Cf. People v Kruger, 302 NY 447, 450.)
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.
[718] Order affirmed in a memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Stummer, 337 N.E.2d 128, 37 N.Y.2d 717, 374 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 2089 (N.Y. 1975).
337 N.E.2d 128 (People v. Stummer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Hicks
59 A.D.2d 251 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)