State v. Cubberly

New York Court of General Session of the Peace

State v. Cubberly

80 A. 1003, 26 Del. 100, 3 Boyce 100, 1911 Del. LEXIS 17

CourtNew York Court of General Session of the Peace

DecidedMay 4, 1911

DocketNo. 37

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 80 A. 1003 (State v. Cubberly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of General Session of the Peace primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Cubberly, 80 A. 1003, 26 Del. 100, 3 Boyce 100, 1911 Del. LEXIS 17 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Woolley, J.,

charging the jury:

[1] Gentlemen of the jury:—The offense for which this defendant is indicted is not a statutory offense in this state, but it is an offense that had its origin at common law. It possesses several elements which must be proven to secure a conviction, the principal one being the element of malice. In every trespass that amounts to malicious mischief, there must be malice of a certain character, that is, a certain malignity, which, when it inspires mischief, results in damage to the community or tends to a breach of the peace.

[2] We are convinced, from the testimony produced by the state, that this is not a case of malicious mischief; that at most it is a case of private trespass, for which the prosecutrix has her remedy against the defendant in a civil action. Therefore we think that the defendant should not be called upon to defend in a matter in which the state has not proven the elements of the crime [102]*102charged against him. We therefore direct you and bind you to return a vérdict of not guilty.

Verdict, not guilty.

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

Woolley, J.,

charging the jury:

[1] Gentlemen of the jury:—The offense for which this defendant is indicted is not a statutory offense in this state, but it is an offense that had its origin at common law. It possesses several elements which must be proven to secure a conviction, the principal one being the element of malice. In every trespass that amounts to malicious mischief, there must be malice of a certain character, that is, a certain malignity, which, when it inspires mischief, results in damage to the community or tends to a breach of the peace.

[2] We are convinced, from the testimony produced by the state, that this is not a case of malicious mischief; that at most it is a case of private trespass, for which the prosecutrix has her remedy against the defendant in a civil action. Therefore we think that the defendant should not be called upon to defend in a matter in which the state has not proven the elements of the crime [102]*102charged against him. We therefore direct you and bind you to return a vérdict of not guilty.

Verdict, not guilty.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A. 1003, 26 Del. 100, 3 Boyce 100, 1911 Del. LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cubberly-nygensess-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack