People v. Stummer

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Stummer

337 N.E.2d 128, 37 N.Y.2d 717, 374 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 2089

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 24, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 337 N.E.2d 128 (People v. Stummer) 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. 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).

Pincite

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]*718Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

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]*718Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

337 N.E.2d 128, 37 N.Y.2d 717, 374 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 2089, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stummer-ny-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack