(DOWNLOAD) "People State New York v. William Powell and John Pilgrim" by Supreme Court of New York " eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: People State New York v. William Powell and John Pilgrim
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 01, 1964
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 71 KB
Description
In our opinion, the trial court committed prejudicial error when it summarily overruled, without a hearing, the defendants' challenge to the jury panel, despite the absence of any exception or denial by the prosecutor with respect to such challenge (Code Crim. Pro., §Â§ 363, 364, 366; People v. Ebelt, 180 N. Y. 470, 474-475; People v. Wilber, 15 N. Y. S. 435; People v. Damron, 160 App. Div. 424, affd. 212 N. Y. 256; see, also, People v. Dow, 3 A.D.2d 979; People v. Weiss, 19 A.D.2d 900; People v. Lawrence, 19 A.D.2d 899). We also believe that by reason of the trial court's assignment of a single attorney to represent the two defendants whose interests were in conflict, the defendant Pilgrim was denied ""his right to have the effective assistance of counsel"" (Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 75-76). The defendant Pilgrim was also deprived of a fair trial by the court's failure adequately to instruct the jury that it could not consider the written and oral admissions of his co-defendant Powell as evidence against Pilgrim. It is true that at the time of the admission of the written confession and again at defense counsel's request at the end of the main charge, the court did instruct the jury that Powell's confession was ""not binding on the defendant Pilgrim."" But such cursory and perfunctory instruction without further elaboration or explanation, may not be deemed to neutralize the repeated and emphatic references, both by the prosecutor in his summation and by the court in its main charge, to Powell's written and oral admissions as indicative of the guilt of both defendants. A reading of the whole charge leaves no doubt of its inadequacy and prejudice as to the defendant Pilgrim, despite the court's superficial attempt to cure the error after the main charge (cf. People v. Lombard, 4 A.D.2d 666 and cases there cited). Indeed, the ambivalence of the charge, when read in its entirety and in the light of the prosecutor's summation, served to accentuate the error rather than to correct it.
 "People State New York v. William Powell and John Pilgrim" by Supreme Court of New York " eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free){kind=link}