Opinion
March 16, 1949.
Appeal from County Court of Otsego County.
The circumstances shown as to defendant's possession of the stolen goods were such as to sharply define an issue as to defendant's criminal intent. The court's instructions to the jury in the main charge covered that matter in a rather general way but were clouded by a statement in refusing a request to charge, whereby the jury could have been made to understand that defendant's criminal intent was not requisite to his conviction of the crimes charged as misdemeanors instead of felonies. Such was highly prejudicial and calls for a reversal. Judgment of conviction reversed, on the law and facts, and a new trial ordered. Foster, P.J., Heffernan, Brewster, Santry and Bergan, JJ., concur.