People v. Savino

• Decision Date: 04 February 1965
• Citation: 15 N.Y.2d 778,257 N.Y.S.2d 345
• Parties: , 205 N.E.2d 536 The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. William SAVINO, Appellant, and William Arthur DeBerry, Defendant.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 345

257 N.Y.S.2d 345

15 N.Y.2d 778, 205 N.E.2d 536

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. William SAVINO, Appellant, and William Arthur DeBerry, Defendant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Feb. 4, 1965.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, 20 A.D.2d 901, 248 N.Y.S.2d 984.

Defendant was convicted of first degree robbery, first degree grand larceny, and second degree assault. The County Court, Kings County, Samuel S. Leibowitz, J., entered judgment, and the defendant appealed.

The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment and held that error in admission into evidence of defendant's hat and coat seized as result of a search not incidental to defendant's arrest did not affect defendant's substantial rights, could be disregarded, and was not ground for reversal, where prosecuting witness first identified defendant at police station when he was not wearing the hat and coat.

The defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals, contending that the receipt in evidence of the defendant's hat and coat amounted to prejudicial error as a matter of law because the prosecution saw fit to present evidence of fact that prosecuting witness identified the defendant while he was wearing the hat and coat as well as when he was not wearing them.

Herbert A. Lyon, Kew Gardens (Herbert A. Lyon, Kew Gardens, William Erlbaum, New York City, and Stephen Mandell, Brooklyn, on the brief), for appellant.

Aaron E. Koota, Brooklyn (Frank Di Lalla, Brooklyn, of counsel), for respondents.

Judgment affirmed.

All concur.