Legal Opinion
People v. Burwell
New York Court of Appeals
Decided April 16, 1970PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Per curiam
Defendant Burwell, who did not testify, suffered no prejudicial error in the admission of his codefendants ’ confessions, since the confessants testified and were available to Bur-well for cross-examination. The rule in People v. Anthony (24 N Y 2d 696, 702-703) is applicable and determinative.
Nor did defendants. McMoore and Washington suffer prejudicial error in the admission of the several confessions, under limiting instructions. Since all the defendants on trial had separately confessed in substantially identical terms, the rule in People v. McNeil (24 N Y 2d 550, 552-553) is applicable…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Gilbert v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- People v. BurwellNew York Supreme Court · 1966
3Cited by23 opinions
- People v. WhiteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- People v. SheaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- People v. FappianoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- People v. ScottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- People v. WongAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.