People ex rel. Eastman v. La Vallee

12 A.D.2d 550, 206 N.Y.S.2d 834, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7248
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 4, 1960
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 12 A.D.2d 550 (People ex rel. Eastman v. La Vallee) 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. Eastman v. La Vallee, 12 A.D.2d 550, 206 N.Y.S.2d 834, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7248 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Opinion

Appeal by the relator from an order of the Supreme Court, Clinton County, which dismissed a writ of habeas corpus. The relator was indicted in March, 1955 for violation of the Public Health Law with respect to narcotic drugs. During the course of his trial thereon in June, 1955 a mistrial was declared on the motion of relator’s counsel. Thereafter on November 3, 1955 a motion for the dismissal of the indictment was granted with permission to submit the matter to another Grand Jury. An order dismissing the indictment was thereafter signed on November 14, 1955. In the meantime the Grand Jury returned another indictment charging relator with the same crime as did the first. The relator was tried, convicted and sentenced under this second indictment. The petition [551]*551for the present writ of habeas corpus was based on the allegation of double jeopardy. On the return date the Attorney-General was granted time in which to produce the decision granting permission to resubmit the relator’s case to the Grand Jury. Thereafter that was done and the court below dismissed the writ. There is no merit in the relator’s claim of double jeopardy. This is not a situation where the first trial was terminated without legal and justifiable cause nor without the relator’s consent. The relator moved for the mistrial and he may not now complain that his motion was granted. The matter was resubmitted to the Grand Jury with the relator being tried on the indictment resulting therefrom. There is further no merit in relator’s contention that he was denied a proper hearing on the return of the writ. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs.

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

Related

De Canzio v. Kennedy
67 A.D.2d 111 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
United States ex rel. Eastman v. Fay
225 F. Supp. 848 (S.D. New York, 1961)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 A.D.2d 550, 206 N.Y.S.2d 834, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-eastman-v-la-vallee-nyappdiv-1960.