New York Criminal Reports (Volume 19); Reports of Cases Decided in All Courts of the State of New York Involving Questions of Criminal Law and Practice with Notes and References (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1907. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... as matter of law to disregard the evidence of the witness Jones. (People v. Davis, 15 Wend. 0OT; People v. Led won, 153 N. Y. 10; People v. Evans, 40 N. Y. 1; The Santissima, 7 Wheat. 283.) The action of the court in refusing to permit the defensse to phrase a hypothetical question which did not contain the recital, as an element, of a "co-extensive congestion of the lungs" and in ruling out the question which used the language of Dr. Donlin's testimony, "congestion that was not exactly co-extensive," was error of the most prejudicial character. (Stewart v. Field, 90 N. Y. 640; People v. Conroy, 151 N. Y. 543; Cole v. Fall Brook Coal Co., 159 X. Y. 59; Stearns v. Field, 90 N. Y. 040; Cowley v. People, 83 N. Y. 464; Dilleber v. 11. L. Ins. Co., 87 N. Y. 79; 11 X. Y. Ann. Oas. 37; Gray v. B. II. R. R. Co., 72 App. Div. 424; Woodward v. C. M. S. P. Ry Co., 122 Fed. Rep. 66.) The exclusion of the testimony of the witness Charles T. Adams was a serious error which greatly prejudiced the defendant's rights. (Bean v. Tonnele, 94 N. Y. 381; Costello v. Crowell, 183 Mass. 352; 1 Taylor on Ev. sec. 576; Rice on Ev. 328; McKeon v. People, 1 N. Y. Cr. Rep. 457; People v. Choy Ah Sing, 84 Cal. 276; Plummer v. Comm., 1 Ky. 76; Arnold v. State, 9 Tex. App. 435; People v. Driseoll, 107 N. Y. 414; Donohue v. People, 56 X. Y. 208; People v. Jones, 106 N. Y. 523; People v. Gehmele, 1 Sheld. 251.) There was no adequate or legal evidence amounting to a corroboration of the testimony of the accomplice Jones, connecting the defendant with the commission of the crime of murder; and the court should have so advised the jury. (Code Crim. Pro. sec. 399; People v. Page, 162 N. Y. 272; People v. O'Farrell, 175 N. Y. 323; People v. Led won, 153 N. Y. 20; People v. Courtney, 28 Hun, 594; Peop...

R786

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles7860
Mobicred@R74pm x 12* Mobicred Info
Free Delivery
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1907. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... as matter of law to disregard the evidence of the witness Jones. (People v. Davis, 15 Wend. 0OT; People v. Led won, 153 N. Y. 10; People v. Evans, 40 N. Y. 1; The Santissima, 7 Wheat. 283.) The action of the court in refusing to permit the defensse to phrase a hypothetical question which did not contain the recital, as an element, of a "co-extensive congestion of the lungs" and in ruling out the question which used the language of Dr. Donlin's testimony, "congestion that was not exactly co-extensive," was error of the most prejudicial character. (Stewart v. Field, 90 N. Y. 640; People v. Conroy, 151 N. Y. 543; Cole v. Fall Brook Coal Co., 159 X. Y. 59; Stearns v. Field, 90 N. Y. 040; Cowley v. People, 83 N. Y. 464; Dilleber v. 11. L. Ins. Co., 87 N. Y. 79; 11 X. Y. Ann. Oas. 37; Gray v. B. II. R. R. Co., 72 App. Div. 424; Woodward v. C. M. S. P. Ry Co., 122 Fed. Rep. 66.) The exclusion of the testimony of the witness Charles T. Adams was a serious error which greatly prejudiced the defendant's rights. (Bean v. Tonnele, 94 N. Y. 381; Costello v. Crowell, 183 Mass. 352; 1 Taylor on Ev. sec. 576; Rice on Ev. 328; McKeon v. People, 1 N. Y. Cr. Rep. 457; People v. Choy Ah Sing, 84 Cal. 276; Plummer v. Comm., 1 Ky. 76; Arnold v. State, 9 Tex. App. 435; People v. Driseoll, 107 N. Y. 414; Donohue v. People, 56 X. Y. 208; People v. Jones, 106 N. Y. 523; People v. Gehmele, 1 Sheld. 251.) There was no adequate or legal evidence amounting to a corroboration of the testimony of the accomplice Jones, connecting the defendant with the commission of the crime of murder; and the court should have so advised the jury. (Code Crim. Pro. sec. 399; People v. Page, 162 N. Y. 272; People v. O'Farrell, 175 N. Y. 323; People v. Led won, 153 N. Y. 20; People v. Courtney, 28 Hun, 594; Peop...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

General Books LLC

Country of origin

United States

Release date

2012

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

2012

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 11mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

202

ISBN-13

978-1-153-87098-6

Barcode

9781153870986

Categories

LSN

1-153-87098-3



Trending On Loot