Legal Opinion

People v. Luft

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided April 5, 1940PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The trial court, over objection and exception, erroneously permitted the People to elicit from defendant, upon cross-examination, the fact that when under arrest defendant had refused to answer any questions concerning his relations with the two complaining witnesses. It is the rule in this State that a defendant under arrest is under no duty to speak or to deny any accusation made against him. Testimony of silence of the defendant as an admission in such circumstances constitutes error. (People v. Rutigliano, 261 N. Y. 103, 106, 107; People v. Dolce, Id. 108; People v. Marendi, 213 id. 600,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. RutiglianoNew York Court of Appeals · 1933
  2. Commonwealth v. McDermottMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
  3. Bulfer v. PeopleAppellate Court of Illinois · 1908

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. HymanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1954
  2. United States ex rel. Parker v. McMannDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API