Hitchins v. . the People
New York Court of Appeals
The plaintiff was convicted at a Court of Sessions in Niagara county of permitting his office to be used for gambling. Various exceptions to the ruling of the court were taken upon, trial; judgment was suspended, and the proceedings were removed into the Supreme Court by certiorari. The conviction was by that court affirmed, and the Court of Sessions directed to proceed to judgment.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff was convicted at a Court of Sessions in Niagara county of permitting his office to be used for gambling. Various exceptions to the ruling of the court were taken upon, trial; judgment was suspended, and the proceedings were removed into the Supreme Court by certiorari. The conviction was by that court affirmed, and the Court of Sessions directed to proceed to judgment. After judgment by the latter court, and affirmance thereof by the Supreme Court, the plaintiff served out a writ of error by which the record was removed into this court. The questions arising upon the exceptions…
1Opinion of the Court
The counsel for the people insists that the only question that can be reviewed by this court is, whether the judgment pronounced upon the verdict was legal. In this the counsel is mistaken. The argument is based upon the idea that this was the only question reviewed by the Supreme Court upon the affirmance of the judgment. It is a sufficient answer to this that the record fails to show such fact, but shows the contrary. Not only was the judgment rendered, but also the bill of exceptions was before the court upon that occasion, and it was entirely competent for the court to consider and pass…
2Cited by7 opinions
- People ex rel. Guido v. CalkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
- Shepard v. DyeWashington Supreme Court · 1926
- Zotalis v. CannellosSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
- People ex rel. Healey v. ForbesNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- State v. WadeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.