State v. Cohen
| Decision Date | 10 December 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 1.,1. |
| Citation | 157 A. 437 |
| Parties | STATE v. COHEN. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Error to Court of Quarter Sessions, Atlantic County.
Morris E. Cohen was convicted of assault and battery and of committing, in private, an act of lewdness and carnal indecency with another, and he brings error.
Affirmed.
Argued May term, 1931, before GUMMERE, C. J., and PARKER and CASE, JJ.
John C. Reed, of Atlantic City, for plaintiff in error.
Louis A. Repetto, Prosecutor of the Pleas, of Atlantic City, for the State.
The writ of error in this case brings up for review the conviction of the defendant had upon the trial of an indictment presented against him by the grand jury of Atlantic county. The indictment contained three counts, the second of which was abandoned by the state when the trial of the case was moved. The first count charged the defendant with committing an assault and battery upon one Adele Holland. The third count charged that the defendant did, with malicious intent, in private, commit an act of lewdness and carnal indecency with the said Adele Holland, which was grossly scandalous, and which tended to debauch the morals and manners of the people, in that he did at the time and place stated in the count expose his private parts to the said Adele Holland. The result of the trial was the conviction of the defendant upon each of these counts.
The proofs submitted on the part of the state showed that Mrs. Holland went to the office of the defendant, who was a dentist practicing in Atlantic City, for the purpose of having some of her teeth extracted and certain bridge work done; that she visited his office on several occasions for that purpose; that on one of these occasions, after having had some of her teeth extracted, she left the office and went into the waiting room, and that, as she was putting on her hat and coat there, the defendant came into the room, grabbed hold of her, pushed her back into the office, and then started to lift up her dress; that at this time he indecently exposed his person; that she told him to let her alone, and that he replied that he would smack her in the mouth if she did not keep quiet; that he then pushed her over to another room, where there was a little cot near the door, but that he suddenly let go of her and ran out of the office, there being people in the waiting room who might perhaps have heard the noise. This testimony was denied by the defendant, but the jury evidently believed it, as their verdict finding him guilty on the first count indicates.
The first ground upon which the plaintiff in error seeks a reversal is that count No. 1, as he alleges, does not properly charge a crime denounced by the laws of New Jersey. Just what counsel means by this assertion it is somewhat difficult to understand, in view of the fact that this count charges the offense of assault and battery in the usual form. However, we are not called upon to consider this ground for reversal. Section 44 of our Criminal Procedure Act (2 Comp. St. 1910, p. 1834) requires that "every objection to any indictment, for any defect of form of substance...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Fleckenstein
...whether so or not, corroboration of the complaining witness was not legally essential to a conviction.' See also State v. Cohen, 108 N.J.L. 216, 157 A. 437 (Sup.Ct.1931), where the court upheld a conviction of defendant for an act of lewdness and carnal indecency, apparently based upon the ......
-
State v. Lustberg, s. 1, 2, 3.
...521, 41 A. 701; State v. Sharkey, 73 N. J. Law, 491, 63 A. 866; State v. Sing Lee, 94 N. J. Law, 270, 110 A. 113." State v. Cohen, 108 N. J. Law, 216, 157 A. 437, 438. It is next urged that the trial judge committed error in admitting into evidence papers containing statements made by defen......
-
State v. Vliet, 5.
...ruling was correct. The indictment follows the language of the statute. This is sufficient. Graves v. State, 45 N.J.L. 203; State v. Cohen, 108 N.J.L. 216, 157 A. 437. In any event, motions to quash are addressed to the sound discretion of the court. State v. Hageman, 13 N.J.L. 314, 323; St......
-
State v. Longo, 4.
...Graves v. State, 45 N.J.L. 203; State v. Nugent, 77 N.L.J. 84, 71 A. 485; State v. Caporale, 85 N.J.L. 495, 89 A. 1034; State v. Cohen, 108 N.J. L. 216, 157 A. 437 and State v. Vliet, 120 N.J.L. 23, 197 A. 894. The settled ruling was followed in those cases that the indictment was sufficien......