In re People

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re People

20 A.D.2d 583, 245 N.Y.S.2d 185, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2664

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 19, 1963

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 20 A.D.2d 583 (In re People) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re People, 20 A.D.2d 583, 245 N.Y.S.2d 185, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2664 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Appellant’s contention that he was not arraigned on the indictment to which he pleaded guilty is contrary to at least some of the inferences to be drawn from the admittedly inconsistent records; but it has been held that a failure to arraign does not tend to prejudice the rights of a defendant who pleads guilty or proceeds to trial. (People v. Kass, 35 Misc 2d 449, 450 [resettlement den. 36 Misc 2d 1], affd. 18 A D 2d 796.) As to the second ground of appellant’s application, the acceptance of his plea of guilty, through his attorney, in open court, would not constitute grounds for reversal upon a direct appeal (People v. Sadness, 300 N. Y. 69, 73, cert. den. 338 U. S. 952) or, consequently, a basis for coram nobis. In any event, each ground is for error appearing upon the face of the record and hence coram nobis cannot be invoked in the case of either. (People v. Kass, supra, p. 450 [as to nonarraignment]; People v. Sadness, supra, pp. 73-74 [as to plea].) Order unanimously affirmed. Present — Bergan, P. J., Gibson, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appellant’s contention that he was not arraigned on the indictment to which he pleaded guilty is contrary to at least some of the inferences to be drawn from the admittedly inconsistent records; but it has been held that a failure to arraign does not tend to prejudice the rights of a defendant who pleads guilty or proceeds to trial. (People v. Kass, 35 Misc 2d 449, 450 [resettlement den. 36 Misc 2d 1], affd. 18 A D 2d 796.) As to the second ground of appellant’s application, the acceptance of his plea of guilty, through his attorney, in open court, would not constitute grounds for reversal upon a direct appeal (People v. Sadness, 300 N. Y. 69, 73, cert. den. 338 U. S. 952) or, consequently, a basis for coram nobis. In any event, each ground is for error appearing upon the face of the record and hence coram nobis cannot be invoked in the case of either. (People v. Kass, supra, p. 450 [as to nonarraignment]; People v. Sadness, supra, pp. 73-74 [as to plea].) Order unanimously affirmed. Present — Bergan, P. J., Gibson, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 583, 245 N.Y.S.2d 185, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-people-nyappdiv-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack