Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Israel H. Meyers, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1906-06-08
Citations: 113 A.D. 409
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Israel H. Meyers, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 113
Pages: 409–410

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Israel H. Meyers, Appellant.
Second Department,
June 8, 1906.
Crime—reversal for restriction of cross-examination of witnesses.
When a defendant of previous good character has heen 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 he 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 in furtherance of justice will grant a new trial.
Appeal 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. Ridgway with him on the brief], for the appellant.
Franklin A. Coles, 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.