From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Botwin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 21, 1934
241 App. Div. 527 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)

Opinion

June 21, 1934.

Appeal from Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, New York County.

Archibald Palmer of counsel [ Sydney Basil Levy and H. Henry Steinberg with him on the brief; Archibald Palmer, attorney], for the appellant.

John C. McDermott of counsel [ William Copeland Dodge, District Attorney], for the respondent.

Present — FINCH, P.J., MERRELL, MARTIN, O'MALLEY and UNTERMYER, JJ.


In the circumstances disclosed in the record, the application of the defendant for an adjournment upon the ground of engagement of counsel should have been granted. The defendant was charged with giving a false financial statement in violation of the provisions of section 1293-b of the Penal Law. The charge was one which peculiarly entitled the defendant to be represented by counsel familiar with the case in order that the defense might be fully and fairly developed and presented.

The judgment should, therefore, be reversed and a new trial ordered.


Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered.


Summaries of

People v. Botwin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 21, 1934
241 App. Div. 527 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)
Case details for

People v. Botwin

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. NATHAN BOTWIN…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 21, 1934

Citations

241 App. Div. 527 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)
272 N.Y.S. 878

Citing Cases

People v. Hull

The granting or refusal of an adjournment rests in discretion ( People v. Jackson, 111 N.Y. 362), but…

People v. Gordon

The matter of granting or refusing an adjournment rests in sound judicial discretion ( People v. Jackson, 111…