State v. Cubberly

80 A. 1003, 26 Del. 100, 3 Boyce 100, 1911 Del. LEXIS 17
New York Court of General Session of the Peace·Decided May 4, 1911·No. No. 37·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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] charged 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

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

80 A. 1003 (State v. Cubberly) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

N
8 I. & N. Dec. 466 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 1959)