From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Richardson

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 10, 1963
192 N.E.2d 30 (N.Y. 1963)

Summary

In People v. Richardson (13 N.Y.2d 763) we unanimously upheld the Appellate Division's reversal of such a conviction, on the ground that the possession was not recent enough for the rule to be applicable.

Summary of this case from People v. Volpe

Opinion

Argued May 28, 1963

Decided July 10, 1963

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, WILLIAM E. RINGEL, J., MAURICE H. MATZKIN, J. HOWARD ROSSBACH, JJ., WILLIAM E. RINGEL, J.P., EDWARD J. CHAPMAN, SIMON SILVER, JJ.

Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney ( Joseph A. Phillips and H. Richard Uviller of counsel), for appellant.

Kieran O'Doherty and Charles F. Brennan, Jr., for Thomas Richardson, respondent.

James F. Dwyer and Charles F. Brennan, Jr., for Waverly Watson, respondent.


Orders affirmed; no opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, VAN VOORHIS, BURKE, FOSTER and SCILEPPI.


Summaries of

People v. Richardson

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 10, 1963
192 N.E.2d 30 (N.Y. 1963)

In People v. Richardson (13 N.Y.2d 763) we unanimously upheld the Appellate Division's reversal of such a conviction, on the ground that the possession was not recent enough for the rule to be applicable.

Summary of this case from People v. Volpe
Case details for

People v. Richardson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. THOMAS RICHARDSON and…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 10, 1963

Citations

192 N.E.2d 30 (N.Y. 1963)
192 N.E.2d 30
242 N.Y.S.2d 63

Citing Cases

People v. Volpe

The rule regarding possession of recently stolen goods without adequate explanation should be applied…