Legal Opinion

People v. Cender

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 7, 1966PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

The defendant was tried with a codefendant and was implicated by name in the latter’s confession which was received into evidence. Since this confession was held by the Appellate Division to be inadmissible and a new trial was ordered as to the codefendant, the Appellate Division should also have reversed this defendant’s conviction and ordered a new trial in the interests of justice. (See, e.g., People v. Morgan, 17 N Y 2d 696; People v. Donovan, 13 N Y 2d 148, 154; People v. Robinson, 13 N Y 2d 296; People v. Rodriguez, 11 N Y 2d 279, 285; People v. Noble, 9 N Y 2d 571, 575; People v.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. RudishNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
  2. People v. AbelNew York Court of Appeals · 1949

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API