Case ID: nj-misc_2/html/0206-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. FRANK FLANNAGAN AND WILLIAM BRENNAN, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR.
    Submitted December 3, 1923
    Decided March 12, 1924.
    Crimes — Robbery—Reyersal Asked on Account of Alleged Improper Examination of Defendant, Alleged Improper Comment of Trial Judge, &c. — No Prejudicial Error Found.
    On error to the Essex Comity Court- of Quarter Sessions.
    Before Justices Tren chard and Campbell.
    Eor the plaintiffs in error, Irving 17. Teefle.
    
    For the state, John O. Bigelow, prosecutor of the pleas.
   Per Curiam.

The defendants were convicted of robbery at the Essex County Quarter Sessions Court, and have sued out a writ of error. The matter is before us under both section 136 of the Criminal Procedure act and exceptions taken at the trial and sealed.

The matters urged as ground for reversal are: Remarks made by the trial judge and prosecutor during the selection of the jury; alleged improper cross-examination of the defendant Flannagan; refusal to direct a mistrial; alleged improper comment and questions by the trial judge; refusal of the trial judge to direct a verdict and that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. An examination of these matters leads us to the conclusions that there was no prejudice or harmful error and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.