State v. Niesbbalski
| Decision Date | 19 April 1912 |
| Citation | 83 A. 179,82 N.J.L. 177 |
| Parties | STATE v. NIESBBALSKI |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Error to Court of Quarter Sessions, Essex County.
Leonard Niesbbalski was convicted of felonious assault, while attempting to rob, and he brings error. Reversed.
Argued November Term, 1911, before GUMMERE, C. J., and SWAYZE and VOORHEES, JJ.
Harry Kalisch, of Newark, for plaintiff in error.
Frederick A. Lehlbach, prosecutor of the pleas, of Newark, for the State.
The plaintiff in error, the defendant below, and three other men were jointly indicted by the grand jury of Essex county for a felonious assault upon one Frederick Vetter, committed while attempting to rob the Thirteenth Ward Building & Loan Association of the city of Newark on the 10th day of December, 1909. By order of the court, there was a severance, and the defendant was tried alone.
On the evening of the day mentioned in the indictment, the building and loan association was holding a session its room at the rear of a saloon occupied by one Krause, for the purpose of receiving dues, collecting loans, etc. About $6,900 had been taken in, and the business of the meeting was about concluded, when suddenly 4 or 5 men rushed into the saloon with drawn revolvers shouting, "Hands up." Two of them went into the back room, and one of these went over to where the treasurer of the association was sitting at a table, and made a grab for the money which was in the table drawer. He only got a few dollars in his hand, and the treasurer then managed to get the rest of the fund into the association's safe, and locked it up there. During this proceeding, there were in the saloon some 10 or 12 men, among whom was Vetter; and, when it was; learned that a "hold-up" was being attempted in the room of the association, an effort was made by them to arrest those of the gang who remained in the saloon. Four or five shots were fired, and Vetter was wounded in the head. All of the members of the gang succeeded in making their escape. On the 21st of the following April, more than four months later, the defendant was arrested by Detective Tuite of the Newark police force upon a complaint charging him with being one of the party engaged in the attempted robbery and the assault upon Vetter. He was taken to police headquarters, and Vetter, and some other of the witnesses to the occurrence, were brought down there together to see whether they could identify him. He and one other man were placed before them, and Vetter picked out the defendant as being one of the men who took part in the holdup. Whether any other of the witnesses so identified him does not appear, except from the fact that they were none of them called by the state to testify at the trial. Vetter...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Roach
...following his receipt of information from an informant created "inescapable" hearsay inference); see also State v. Niesbbalski, 82 N.J.L. 177, 179, 83 A. 179 (S.Ct.1912) (noting detective's testimony created by "necessary inference" the conclusion that complaint against the defendant was ba......
-
State v. Orecchio
...of justice, keeping out gossip, rumor, unfounded report, second--, third--, or further hand stories.' See also State v. Niesbbalski, 82 N.J.L. 177, 180, 83 A. 179, (Sup.Ct.1912); 5 Wigmore, supra, § V The defendant Orecchio had occupied an office in the prosecutor's suite in the Bergen Coun......
-
The State v. Tipton
...ever had or used or was ever seen in his brother's automobile. State v. Grote, 109 Mo. 348; State v. Butler, 113 Me. 1; State v. Niesbbalski, 82 N. J. L. 177; Kirby State, 44 Fla. 81; Johnson v. State, 250 S.W. 681. (2) The instruction of the court defining larceny is erroneous. Sec. 3312, ......
-
State v. Long
...points to the guilt of the defendant, the testimony is inadmissible. Bankston, supra, 63 N.J. at 271, 307 A.2d 65; State v. Niesbbalski, 82 N.J.L. 177, 83 A. 179 (Sup.Ct.1912). The response of Officer Tumillo in this case did not directly or by necessary inference implicate defendant. The i......