People v. Lefkowitz
Citation | 178 N.E. 794,257 N.Y. 560 |
Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Samuel LEFKOWITZ, Appellant. |
Decision Date | 20 October 1931 |
Court | New York Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department (232 App. Div. 18, 248 N. Y. S. 615), entered March 17, 1931, which affirmed a judgment of the Court of Special Sessions of the city of New York convicting the defendant of the crime of petit larceny. It was contended that the information alleged facts which constituted the crime of grand larceny, and that therefore the Court of Special Sessions had no jurisdiction to try the defendant on the charge of petit larceny.I. Nicholas Gordon, of New York City, for appellant.
Thomas C. T. Crain, Dist. Atty., of New York City (Robert C. Taylor, of New York City, of counsel), for the People.
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Hawkins
...... As a prelude to the law appertaining to the merits of the chief issue, it should be borne in mind that the prerogative of charging an offense vests in the district attorney, if he believes the charge to be proper (People, on Complaint of Kane v. Lefkowitz, 232 App.Div. 18, 248 N.Y.S. 615, affirmed 257 N.Y. 560, 178 N.E. 794), for it lies within the province of the district attorney to chart the course of a prosecution (People v. [32 Misc.2d 823] Edwards, 19 Misc.2d 412, 189 N.Y.S.2d 39; see also, People . Page 459. ex rel. Gardenier v. Board of ......
-
People v. Samuels
...offense. People v. Hirsh, 283 N.Y. 638, 28 N.E.2d 37;People on Complaint of Kane v. Lefkowitz, 232 App.Div. 18, 248 N.Y.S. 615, affirmed, 257 N.Y. 560, 178 N.E. 794. We find, in this record, however, error of law which sustains the reversal of the conviction. To establish perjury under our ......
-
People v. Goedkoop
...... Although the defendant by his own testimony and other testimony presented proof tending to show that he was not intoxicated, the issue of fact was fairly submitted and determined by the jury, and the verdict may not be overturned on appeal (People on Complaint of Kane v. Lefkowitz, 232 App.Div. 18, 248 N.Y.S. 615, affirmed 257 N.Y. 560, 178 N.E. 794). The defendant attacks the scientific accuracy of the blood test, however, and his contention deserves serious consideration. It appears that after the blood was withdrawn from the defendant by a physician, it ......
-
Perkins v. United States, 15069.
...... We agree that the Alaska court chose the "more rational doctrine". It was established by law in the following cases: People, on Complaint of Kane v. Lefkowitz, 1931, 232 App.Div. 18, 248 N.Y.S. 615, affirmed 1931, 257 N.Y. 560, 178 N.E. 794; People v. Samuels, 1940, 284 ......