Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. John M. Dunn and Daniel Gentile, alias Danny Brooks, Appellants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1949-02-24
Citations: 298 N.Y. 865
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. John M. and alias Danny Brooks, Appellants.
Judges: Concur: LoughbaN, Ch. J., Lewis, CoNway and Fuld, JJ. DesmoNd and Dye, JJ., dissent, and vote to reverse and order a new trial on the ground that the newly discovered evidence could well change the result if presented to a jury and, accordingly, should he so presented. [See 298 N. Y. 564, 706, 929.]
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 298
Pages: 865–866

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. John M. and alias Danny Brooks, Appellants.
Reargued December 1, 1948;
decided February 24, 1949.
Bernard Hershkopf and Hyman Barshay for John M. Dunn, appellant.
Harry G. Anderson and Vincent Tese for Daniel Gentile, appellant.
Frank &'. Hogan, District Attorney (Whitman Knapp and William Hoppen of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
Upon reargument of appeals by appellants John M. Dunn and Daniel Gentile: Judgments of conviction affirmed. No opinion.
Concur: LoughbaN, Ch. J., Lewis, CoNway and Fuld, JJ. DesmoNd and Dye, JJ., dissent, and vote to reverse and order a new trial on the ground that the newly discovered evidence could well change the result if presented to a jury and, accordingly, should he so presented. [See 298 N. Y. 564, 706, 929.]