Majority
Order of filiation of the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, unanimously affirmed, with costs. The limitation of territorial application of chapter 434 of the Laws of 1930[1] does not render the statute invalid. (Matter of Morgan [In re Rolle], 114 App. Div. 45 , 54; People v. Havnor, 149 N. Y. 195 ; Hayes v. Missouri, 120 U. S. 68 ; People ex rel. Armstrong v. Warden, 183 N. Y. 223 ; People ex rel. Ward v. McCann, 117 Misc. 798 ; People ex rel. White v. Comr. of Correction, 198 App. Div. 384 ; People ex rel. Kipnis v. McCann, 199 id. 30.) Rules of evidence are at all times subject to modification and control by the Legislature, and changes thus made may be made applicable to existing causes of action. (Howard v. Moot, 64 N. Y. 262 .) Likewise as to procedural changes. (Sackheim v. Pigueron, 215 N. Y. 62 .) The statute is not an ex post facto law. ( People v. Qualey, 210 N. Y. 202 .) Present — Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Scudder, JJ.
* Amdg. and repealing Inf. Grim. Cts. Act (Laws of 1910, chap. 659), art. 3-B, as added by Laws of 1929, cha.p. 434.— [Rep.
Cases cited
- People v. Havnor 149 N. Y. 195 p. 763
- Hayes v. Missouri 120 U. S. 68 p. 763
- People ex rel. Armstrong v. Warden of City Prison 183 N. Y. 223 p. 763
- People ex rel. Ward v. McCann 117 Misc. 798 p. 763
- People ex rel. White v. Commissioner of Correction 198 App. Div. 384 p. 763
- Howard v. Moot 64 N. Y. 262 p. 763
- Sackheim v. Pigueron 215 N. Y. 62 p. 763