People v. Loewinger
Decision Date | 15 March 1972 |
Citation | 281 N.E.2d 847,30 N.Y.2d 587,330 N.Y.S.2d 801 |
Parties | , 281 N.E.2d 847 PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Robert LOEWINGER, Appellant. |
Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, 37 A.D.2d 675, 323 N.Y.S.2d 98.
John S. McBride, Monticello, Joel M. Proyect, South Fallsburg, for defendant-appellant.
Louis B. Scheinman, Woodbourne, for respondent.
By a judgment of the County Court, Sullivan County, the defendant was convicted of assault in the third degree and prisoner escape and he appealed.
The Appellate Division affirmed.It held that where defense counsel had not set forth any material omission when questioned concerning what portions of witness' cross-examination remained unfinished, witness' complete testimony at preliminary examination, both direct and cross-examination, was read to jury and defense rejected trial court's offer to strike testimony of deceased witness, mistrial was not warranted because witness was killed in an automobile accident during adjournment and before his cross-examination was concluded.The defendant appealed.
In the Court of Appealsthe defendant asserted that the conduct of investigating officers was unreasonable and illegal, that...
To continue reading
Request your trialUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions
-
AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
People v. Schiraldi
...v. Shapiro, 84 Misc.2d 223, 375 N.Y.S.2d 945; People v. Loewinger, 37 A.D.2d 675, 323 N.Y.S.2d 98, aff'd without opinion 30 N.Y.2d 587, 330 N.Y.S.2d 801, 281 N.E.2d 847). These cases uniformly hold that it must not be presumed that a district attorney or assistant district attorn will divul......
-
People v. Williams
...entire District Attorney's office disqualified ( see, People v. Loewinger, 37 A.D.2d 675, 676, 323 N.Y.S.2d 98, affd. 30 N.Y.2d 587, 330 N.Y.S.2d 801, 281 N.E.2d 847). Finally, CPL 190.65(3) requires only that a Grand Jury's foreman or acting foreman hand up its indictments to the court, no......
-
People v. Nuzzi
...DeFreese, 71 A.D.2d 689, 418 N.Y.S.2d 959; People v. Loewinger, 37 A.D.2d 675, 323 N.Y.S.2d 98, affd. on other grounds, 30 N.Y.2d 587, 330 N.Y.S.2d 801, 281 N.E.2d 847; People v. Cruz, 55 A.D.2d 921, 390 N.Y.S.2d 442; Matter of Fox v. Shapiro, 84 Misc.2d 223, 375 N.Y.S.2d 945. These cases h......
-
Charles L., In re
... ... (People v. Wilkins, 28 N.Y.2d 53, 56, 320 N.Y.S.2d 8, 10, 268 N.E.2d 756, 757.) Any analogy between a private law firm and the district attorney's office is ... (See People v. Washington (Sup.Ct., App.Div.) 383 N.Y.S.2d 422, 423; People v. Loewinger, 37 A.D.2d 675, 323 N.Y.S.2d 98, 100--101, aff'd 30 N.Y.2d 587, 330 N.Y.S.2d 801, 281 N.E.2d 847; State v. Miner, 128 Vt.55,[63 Cal.App.3d 766] 258 ... ...