People ex rel. Duryea v. Kieb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Duryea v. Kieb

262 A.D. 912, 29 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6453

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

DecidedJune 30, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D. 912 (People ex rel. Duryea v. Kieb) 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

People ex rel. Duryea v. Kieb, 262 A.D. 912, 29 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6453 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Order sustaining writ of habeas corpus and directing appellant to deliver the body of respondent to the sheriff of the county of Kings affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell and Close, JJ., concur; Taylor, J., dissents and votes to reverse on the facts the order appealed from, to dismiss the writ of habeas corpus, and to remand the respondent to the custody of the appellant-superintendent, with the following memorandum: In my opinion (1) the order appealed from is a final order to discharge a prisoner within the purview of Civil Practice Act, section 1274, and is, therefore, appeal-able; (2) the test of whether relator is entitled to be tried upon the indictment for murder in the first degree found by the grand jury of Kings county in 1914 is whether he is of sufficient ability mentally to understand the charge against him and to make his defense thereto; and (3) the finding recited in the order appealed from to the effect that the relator has such ability is against the weight of evidence which, when the record is considered as a whole, including the testimony of expert witnesses and of the relator, not only warrants but requires a finding that the relator, a sufferer from dementia praeeox, paranoic type, has not such ability.

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

Order sustaining writ of habeas corpus and directing appellant to deliver the body of respondent to the sheriff of the county of Kings affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell and Close, JJ., concur; Taylor, J., dissents and votes to reverse on the facts the order appealed from, to dismiss the writ of habeas corpus, and to remand the respondent to the custody of the appellant-superintendent, with the following memorandum: In my opinion (1) the order appealed from is a final order to discharge a prisoner within the purview of Civil Practice Act, section 1274, and is, therefore, appeal-able; (2) the test of whether relator is entitled to be tried upon the indictment for murder in the first degree found by the grand jury of Kings county in 1914 is whether he is of sufficient ability mentally to understand the charge against him and to make his defense thereto; and (3) the finding recited in the order appealed from to the effect that the relator has such ability is against the weight of evidence which, when the record is considered as a whole, including the testimony of expert witnesses and of the relator, not only warrants but requires a finding that the relator, a sufferer from dementia praeeox, paranoic type, has not such ability.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D. 912, 29 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-duryea-v-kieb-nyappdiv-1941.