Case Name: PETER McCARTHY ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1927-10-27
Citations: 5 N.J. Misc. 960
Docket Number: 
Parties: PETER McCARTHY ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 960–960

Head Matter:
PETER McCARTHY ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR.
Submitted May term, 1927
Decided October 27, 1927.
Before Gummeee, Chief Justice, and Justices Black and Lloyd.
Eor the plaintiffs in error, Kessler & Kessler, and Mott & Bernheim.
Eor the defendant in error, John O. Bigelow, prosecutor of the pleas.

Opinion:
Pee Curiam.
The defendants in this case were convicted under the first and third counts in the indictment, which alleged that the defendants had obtained $1,500 by means of false pretenses. The court directed a verdict for the defendants on the second count — receiving stolen goods. It is now urged for a reversal that the trial court erred in refusing to grant the motion to direct a verdict on the third count — for false pretenses. Let this be as it may, it will not cause a reversal for the conviction on the first count of grand larcény, as that count is not attacked. That count is sufficient to support the judgment. State v. Huggins, 84 N. J. L. 254; State v. Rommel, 3 N. J. Mis. R. 204; affirmed, 3 N. J. Adv. R. 1401.
The judgment of the Essex Court of Quarter Sessions is affirmed.