2 Park. Cr. 583 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1855
The counsel for the prisoner insists that the Court of Sessions erred in allowing, as evidence to characterize the intent of the acts charged as burglary in this indictment, proof of circumstances which upon a trial for another and distinct offence would tend to convict the prisoner of such latter charge; or in other words, that the intent with which the prisoner entered" the grocery of Hall, should not be determined by proof of circumstances tending to show a felony committed in the store of Van Epps.
It" is not to be- disputed, that as a general rule both in civil and' criminal cases, the evidence should be confined to the point in issue; and Phillips, in his treatise on evidence say.* “ In
The ruling of the Court of Sessions was correct and a new trial is denied.