People v. Madas

Decision Date28 March 1911
Citation201 N.Y. 349,94 N.E. 857
PartiesPEOPLE v. MADAS.
CourtNew York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from Supreme Court, Trial Term, Kings County.

Lajama Madas, alias Michael Lantas, was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.

The indictment against the defendant contained two counts, one for killing Selig Kohn while the accused was engaged in the commission of a felony, and the other for killing him willfully, feloniously, and of malice aforethought. The case was sent to the jury on both counts.

Edward J. Reilly, for appellant.

John F. Clarke, Dist. Atty. (Leroy W. Ross, of counsel), for the People.

VANN, J.

In January, 1910, Hyman Kohn carried on a private bank and ticket office on the ground floor of No. 120 Manhattan avenue in the city of Brooklyn, and Tobias Hollander was his cashier and manager in charge. On the evening of January 3, 1910, after 9 o'clock, when the office had been closed in readiness to lock up, the defendant came in said banking office and bought a postage stamp. The next morning at about 8 o'clock he again purchased a stamp and two hours later a paper. On the morning of January 6, 1910, Mr. Hollander had placed in the front window of the office, where they were plainly to be seen, 2,000 rubles in Russian bills. Shortly afterward and at about 8 o'clock the defendant came in and bought a stamp and at 10 o'clock came in again and bought ‘a Polish letter paper.’ All the morning he had been in a saloon diagonally opposite the banking office with several associates, including Fisher and Wasylow, who were jointly indicted with him, except as he left for a few moments at a time on several occasions. At 11 o'clock he entered the banking office again, bought a Polish newspaper, and went out. At about the same time he was seen to enter the saloon, say a few words to his associates, and go out. Shortly afterwards he entered the banking office again, and, when asked by Mr. Hollander what he wanted, made no reply, but went near the front window and stood there. Fisher and several other men who had been associating with the defendant in the saloon came in right after him. At this time Mr. Hollander was standing behind the counter, and Selig Kohn, a brother of the proprietor, was seated in a chair on the opposite side of the room. Fisher approached the counter, and, inquiring of Mr. Hollander the price of a ticket to Europe, was told it would be $33. He asked, ‘Have you anything cheaper?’ Whereupon Hollander turned around with his back toward Fisher to consult a list on the wall. While Hollander was looking at the list, Fisher said, ‘Never mind,’ and, as Hollander turned around to face him, Fisher pointed a revolver at him and said, ‘Hands up!’ One of the other men jumped over a glass partition and seized some of the money in the window, while another caught hold of Selig Kohn. Selig tried to push the men near him out of the office and was struggling with them when the defendant, who had been standing by the window, came up close to Selig, and, holding a revolver within two feet of his head, shot him in the neck. He fell to the floor mortally wounded and died the next day. All the men then ran out, except one who covered Hollander with his revolver for a moment and then he ran out also. Five hundred rubles, worth over $200 in American currency, were missing from the window; but one bill for 100 rubles was found near the door. Neither Selig Kohn nor Hollander was armed; but all the confederates held revolvers in their hands when in the store. Fisher and the defendant were arrested on the street right after the shooting, and a revolver was found on each, and on the defendant a dirk also. The revolver taken from Fisher was fully loaded, while that taken from the defendant had four undischarged cartridges and one shell of a cartridge that had been fired. The cartridges were loaded with semismokeless powder, and the bullets therein were of the same size and make as the one found in the dead body of Selig Kohn. The empty shell was in all respects like the shell of the loaded cartridges. No powder marks were seen about the bullet wound, which was in the neck about two inches below the Adam's apple. The bullet severed the windpipe, passed through the region of the right lung, and was found in the muscles of the back. In the opinion of the physician who conducted the autopsy the wound was the cause of death, through hemorrhage and shock.

No testimony was given by the defendant or by any witness in his behalf, as both parties rested at the close of the case for the people.

[1] If one of the defendant's confederates in fact seized the money, in the eye of the law the defendant seized it also, the same as if each had laid his hands upon it at the same time and they had jointly carried it away. The evidence tended to show that the defendant and his associates were acting in concert to accomplish the common purpose of robbing the bank, and if so they were accomplices in taking the money, and the act of any one in aid of the common purpose was the act of all. People v. Giro, 197 N. Y. 152, 157,90 N. E. 432.

[2] In order to prove the crime of robbery it was unnecessary to show that the rubles taken belonged to Hollander, or that they were taken from his person, provided they were unlawfully taken in his presence, against his will, and by means of force or fear....

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 cases
  • People v. Nieves
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • March 25, 1986
    ... ... --------------- ... 1 The statements, for purposes of the hearsay rules, include the nonverbal assertions made by Miss Gonzalez in pointing to the defendant when asked who had stabbed her (see, People v. Caviness, 38 N.Y.2d 227, 230, 379 N.Y.S.2d 695, 342 N.E.2d 496; People v. Madas, 201 N.Y. 349, 354, 94 N.E. 857) ... 2 In contrast, it is well recognized that statements falling within "firmly rooted" exceptions to the hearsay rule do not ordinarily deny any confrontation rights (Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 66, 100 S.Ct. 2531, 2539, 65 L.Ed.2d 597; see, e.g., Mattox v ... ...
  • People v. Wood
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • May 19, 1960
    ... ... 325, 128 N.E. 228; People v. Marwig, 227 N.Y. 382, 391, 125 N.E. 535, 538, 22 A.L.R. 845; People v. [167 N.E.2d 739] Chapman, 224 N.Y. 463, 121 N.E. 381; People v. Giusto, 206 N.Y. 67, 73-76, 99 N.E. 190, 192-194; People v. Friedman, 205 N.Y. 161, 98 N.E. 471, 45 L.R.A., N.S., 55; People v. Madas, 201 N.Y. 349, 94 N.E. 857; People v. Giro, 197 N.Y. 152, 90 N.E. 432; People v. Flanigan, 174 N.Y. 356, 66 N.E. 988; People v. Wilson, 145 N.Y. 628, 40 N.E. 392; Buel v. People, 78 N.Y. 492, 499; Ruloff v. People, 45 N.Y. 213; 1937 Report of N.Y.Law Rev.Comm., pp. 641-676; Corcoran, Felony Murder ... ...
  • State v. Hackle
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • May 19, 1931
    ... ... robbed, and the indictment must so allege. Rex v ... Philpoe, 2 Leach, 673; People v. Beck, 21 Cal ... 385; Stegar ... [158 S.E. 711] ... v. State, 39 Ga. 583, 99 Am.Dec. 472; Seymour v ... State, 15 Ind. 288; State v ... 139; People v. Vice, 21 Cal. 344; ... State v. Ah Loi, 5 Nev 99; Brooks v ... People, 49 N.Y. 436, 10 Am.Rep. 398; People v ... Madas, 201 N.Y. 349, 94 N.E. 857, Ann.Cas. 1912B, ... 229;  [110 W.Va. 492] Com. v. Clifford, 8 Cush ... (Mass.) 215; Durand v. People, 47 Mich. 332, ... ...
  • Commonwealth v. Homer
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • May 18, 1920
    ... ... Hill v. State, 145 Ala. 58, 60, 40 South. 654;Hill v. State, 42 Neb. 503, 527, 60 N. W. 916;O'Donnell v. People, 224 Ill. 218, 225, 79 N. E. 639,8 Ann. Cas. 123;State v. McAllister, 65 W. Va. 97, 104, 63 S. E. 758,131 Am. St. Rep. 955; Turner v. State, 1 Ohio ... Com. 87 Va. 257;U. S. v. Jones, 3 Wash. C. C. 209, 216, Fed. Cas. No. 15,494;In re Ezeta (D. C.) 62 Fed. 964, 992. See People v. Madas, 201 N. Y. 349, 352,94 N. E. 857, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 229.[4] 3. The defendant requested the court to rule, If the defendant honestly believed that he ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT