Legal Opinion

People v. Petrucelli

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

Decided March 14, 1974PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Per curiam

Viewed in its context with the entire case (United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U. S. 150, 240), the prejudicial and sometimes unethical conduct of the prosecuting attorney has nullified this conviction. While cross-examining a principal defense witness, he remarked, “ I don’t have to believe him. I believe Joan ” (the principal prosecution witness). His summation called the defendant and a defense witness, and by implication all of the defense witnesses, a ‘ ‘ bunch of thieves ’ ’. The expression by a prosecutor of his personal opinion of the witnesses’ credibility is improper…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. People v. MalkinNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
  3. People v. WrightAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. People v. ZimmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. People v. GriffithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
  3. People v. GorghanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  4. People v. GrahamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975
  5. Petrucelli v. SmithDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1982

13 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