Legal Opinion

People v. Arata

New York Court of Appeals

Decided February 10, 1931PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

The conviction in this case rests upon the testimony of two accomplices, corroborated to some extent by other witnesses and by inconsistencies in the defendant’s narrative, which was designed to prove an alibi. The corroborating witnesses for the most part are persons of degraded life. Judges confined to the printed record must have a lingering sense of uncertainty when reviewing a conviction proceeding from these tainted sources. Even so, there can be no reversal of the judgment without breaking down the barriers that separate the functions of a jury from those of an appellate court (People…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. . ShilitanoNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. People v. . CohenNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
  3. People v. . TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
  4. People v. ArataNew York Court of Appeals · 1930

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. People v. LyttonNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
  2. People v. LeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1955
  3. People v. LandersNew York Court of Appeals · 1934
  4. People v. VargasNew York Court of Appeals · 1960
  5. People v. CorapiAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1964

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API