People ex rel. Egerton v. McNeill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Egerton v. McNeill

3 A.D.2d 855, 161 N.Y.S.2d 847, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5873

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

DecidedApril 15, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 3 A.D.2d 855 (People ex rel. Egerton v. McNeill) 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. Egerton v. McNeill, 3 A.D.2d 855, 161 N.Y.S.2d 847, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Appellant, under indictment for murder in the first degree, is in custody in the Matteawan State Hospital under the provisions of section 662-b of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In this habeas corpus proceeding it is alleged that he is now able to confer with counsel so that preparations may proceed for the trial of the indictment. The return alleges that appellant is in such a state of insanity, idiocy, or imbecility as to be unable to understand the nature of the indictment pending against him and to make his defense thereto. The appeal is from an order, made after a hearing, dismissing the writ and remanding appellant, and from the decisions made on the return of said writ. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Appeal from decisions dismissed, without costs. No appeal lies from decisions. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ.

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

Appellant, under indictment for murder in the first degree, is in custody in the Matteawan State Hospital under the provisions of section 662-b of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In this habeas corpus proceeding it is alleged that he is now able to confer with counsel so that preparations may proceed for the trial of the indictment. The return alleges that appellant is in such a state of insanity, idiocy, or imbecility as to be unable to understand the nature of the indictment pending against him and to make his defense thereto. The appeal is from an order, made after a hearing, dismissing the writ and remanding appellant, and from the decisions made on the return of said writ. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Appeal from decisions dismissed, without costs. No appeal lies from decisions. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 855, 161 N.Y.S.2d 847, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-egerton-v-mcneill-nyappdiv-1957.