Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Charles Moore, Plaintiff in Error, v. The People, Defendants in Error, 1873 — 53 N.Y. 639 · caselaw · US
Criminal Law · MBE-tested
Charles Moore, Plaintiff in Error, v. The People, Defendants in Error
53 N.Y. 639·New York Court of Appeals·1873·NY
All concur except Grover, J., not voting.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Charles Moore, Plaintiff in Error, v. The People, Defendants in Error,
(Submitted June 10, 1873 ;
decided September 23, 1873.)
Plaintiff in error was convicted upon an indictment for grand larceny. The 1 case was one known as “ emigrant swindling.” The main question litigated upon the trial was the identity of the prisoner with the person by whom the offence was committed, the testimony on behalf of the prisoner tending to establish an alibi. Upon cross-examination of one of his witnesses he was asked if he had called to see Mr. Wallack, one of the commissioners of emigration, in regard to the case. He answered that he saw Mr. Wallack. The latter was subsequently called by the prosecution and permitted to testify under objection, to declarations of said witness that he was sent by the prisoner’s relatives to request him to allow the complainant to take the money he had lost. This testimony was offered generally, not simply for the purpose of showing that the witness was a friend of the prisoner, and thus of affecting his credibility.—Held, error, and that the evidence was prejudicial to the prisoner, as tending to connect him by hearsay with the offence charged.
A. Oakey Hall for the plaintiff in error.
Benj. K. Phelps, district attorney, for defendants in error.
[MAJORITY — Rapallo, J.,]
Rapallo, J.,
reads for reversal and new trial.
All concur except Grover, J., not voting.
Judgment reversed.