New York Court of Appeals, 1976

People v. Andrus

New York Court of Appeals · Decided February 26, 1976

38 N.Y.2d 925; 346 N.E.2d 820; 382 N.Y.S.2d 981; 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2365

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

People v. Eisenman (N.Y. 1976)

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

Memorandum. The order should be affirmed.

Of the three elements required to be corroborated under the rigid requirements of the rape statute (former Penal Law, § 130.15), which prevailed at the time the defendant was convicted (see People v Linzy, 31 NY2d 99, 100-101), two of them, penetration and identity, were conceded. The third, "force or lack of consent” (at p 101) was supported by a legally competent, though equivocal, admission sufficient to create a question of fact (United States v Picarelli, 148 F2d 997, 998).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order affirmed in memorandum.

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