Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Krulewitch (D) was tried for conspiracy in the transportation of a prostitute from New York City to Miami. D and a woman induced and persuaded another woman to go to Miami, Florida, for the purpose of prostitution. D was indicted and tried alone. D was convicted on all three counts of the indictment. The Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme court granted certiorari limiting review to consideration of the alleged error in admission of certain hearsay testimony against petitioner over his timely and repeated objections. The testimony admitted at trial was from the person whom D and the woman defendant allegedly induced to go from New York to Florida for the purpose of prostitution. It took place a month and a half after the arrest. The woman stated, 'She asked me, she says, 'You didn't talk yet?' And I says, 'No.' And she says, 'Well, don't,' she says, 'until we get you a lawyer.' And then she says, 'Be very careful what you say.' And I can't put it in exact words. But she said, 'It would be better for us two girls to take the blame than Kay (the defendant) because he couldn't stand it, he couldn't stand to take it.' ' D objected to on the grounds that it was hearsay evidence. The evidence showed that there may have been an attempt on the part of the girls transported to continue a cover-up of the criminal conduct. The prosecution offered proof that the admissibility of the statement should be allowed because the evidence shows that there was a continuing subsidiary objective of the conspiracy; to cover it up. D was convicted and appealed. The Court of Appeals adopted the government's view that one of the central implied objectives of a criminal conspiracy would be to cover it up if caught. The Supreme Court granted review.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co