People ex rel. Federle v. Follette
This text of 29 A.D.2d 570 (People ex rel. Federle v. Follette) 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.
Opinion
Judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated October 20, 1966, modified, on the law and the facts, so as to add, after the provision that the writ is “dismissed”, the words: “without prejudice to the reopening of the coram nobis proceeding referred to in respondent’s brief or to any other proceeding appellant may institute upon papers clearly setting forth all the pertinent facts.” As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs. Appellant was convicted of attempted forgery in the third degree on his plea of guilty. It is unclear from the indictment whether he was charged with filing a forged application for a motor vehicle operator’s license with the Department of Motor Vehicles (cf. People v. Sansanese, 17 N Y 2d 302). Appellant, accordingly, should be given the opportunity to raise the question whether he pleaded guilty to facts constituting a crime. Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 A.D.2d 570, 286 N.Y.S.2d 306, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-federle-v-follette-nyappdiv-1967.