From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Singleton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 9, 1964
21 A.D.2d 907 (N.Y. App. Div. 1964)

Opinion

July 9, 1964


Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered November 7, 1963 after a jury trial, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, assault in the second degree and of criminally carrying concealed a loaded pistol, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed on the law and a new trial ordered. The findings of fact implicit in the jury's verdict are affirmed. In our opinion, reversal is required because of the refusal of the trial court to submit the issue of self-defense to the jury (cf. Allison v. United States, 160 U.S. 203, 208-211). It is also our opinion that the court erred in not permitting defendant to testify as to his intent in committing the acts upon which the charges of robbery and assault were based ( People v. Levan, 295 N.Y. 26, 33-34); and in failing to charge that the intent to steal was an essential element of the crime of robbery ( People v. Koerber, 244 N.Y. 147, 153-154; People v. Best, 253 App. Div. 491, 493). We are also of the opinion that some of the prosecutor's remarks during his summation exceeded permissible bounds and constituted error. Beldock, P.J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hill, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Singleton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 9, 1964
21 A.D.2d 907 (N.Y. App. Div. 1964)
Case details for

People v. Singleton

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. THOMAS SINGLETON…

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

Date published: Jul 9, 1964

Citations

21 A.D.2d 907 (N.Y. App. Div. 1964)

Citing Cases

State v. Puga

We hold that a criminal intent is an essential element of the crime of robbery. McGruder v. State, 213 Ga.…

People v. Stewart

The defense pleaded justification alleging that the officers were not performing lawful duties and that…