Case Name: THE PEOPLE v. ISRAEL H. MEYERS
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1906-06-01
Citations: 20 N.Y. Crim. 271
Docket Number: 
Parties: THE PEOPLE v. ISRAEL H. MEYERS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Criminal Reports
Volume: 20
Pages: 271–272

Head Matter:
SUPREME COURT-APP. DIVISION—SECOND DEP.,
June 1, 1906.
THE PEOPLE v. ISRAEL H. MEYERS.
(113 App. Div. 409.)
Trial—Reversed for Restriction of Cross-Examination of Witnesses.
When, a defendant of previous good character has been convicted of an odious crime on the testimony of police officers who claim to have surreptitiously witnessed it, but who did not attempt to arrest him or prevent its consummation he should be allowed the widest latitude in cross-examining them, and when the alleged victim was apparently in league with the officers and was not produced as a witness, the court will grant a new trial.
Apppeal by the defendant, Israel H. Meyers, from a judgment of conviction of the County Court of the county of Nassau, rendered on the 22d day of July, 1905, upon the verdict of a jury.
Thomas Kelby \James W. Bidgway with him on the brief], for the appellant.
Franklin A. Goles, District Attorney, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam :
The defendant, a man of previously good reputation, has been convicted of an odious crime on the testimony of- two officers, who claim to have surreptitiously witnessed it. The defendant should have had afforded him the widest latitude in their cross-examination in view of the fact that they neither attempted to arrest him or to prevent the consummation of the crime. In view of this fact and of the fact that the victim, who was apparently in league with the officers to the extent of submitting to the offense in their sight, was not produced as a witness, and in view of the sharp conflict in the evidence on the question of guilt, we are satisfied that this is a proper case for the ordering of a new trial. The judgment of conviction of the County Court of Nassau county is reversed and a new trial ordered.
Hirschberg, P. J., Woodward, Jenks, Hooker and Miller, JJ., concurred.
Judgment of conviction reversed and new trial ordered.