New York Court of Appeals, 1966

People v. Cender

New York Court of Appeals · Decided July 7, 1966 · Beegan, Bueke, Desmond, Fuld, Keating, McCall, Pugach, Scileppi, Vote, Yooehis

18 N.Y.2d 610; 219 N.E.2d 200; 272 N.Y.S.2d 380; 1966 N.Y. LEXIS 1197

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

People v. Johnson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The defendant was tried with a codefendant and was implicated by name in the latter’s confession which was received into evidence. Since this confession was held by the Appellate Division to be inadmissible and a new trial was ordered as to the codefendant, the Appellate Division should also have reversed this defendant’s conviction and ordered a new trial in the interests of justice. (See, e.g., People v. Morgan, 17 N Y 2d 696; People v. Donovan, 13 N Y 2d 148, 154; People v. Robinson, 13 N Y 2d 296; People v. Rodriguez, 11 N Y 2d 279, 285; People v. Noble, 9 N Y 2d 571, 575; People v. Waterman, 9 N Y 2d 561, 567; People v. Abel, 298 N. Y. 333; People v. Rudish, 294 N. Y. 500.)

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered.

Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Fuld, Bueke, Beegan and Keating concur in Per Curiam opinion; Judges Van Yooehis and Scileppi dissent and vote to affirm. (People v. Pugach, 16 N Y 2d 504; People v. McCall, 17 N Y 2d 152.)

Judgment reversed, etc.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.