People ex rel. Hammersmith v. Brophy
This text of 247 A.D. 860 (People ex rel. Hammersmith v. Brophy) 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
Order affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Appellant has been denied a new trial on the ground of newly-discovered evidence. His application papers were insufficient and in addition his application was late. (Code Crim. Proc. § 465, subd. 7; Id. § 466.) He thereupon sued out a writ of habeas corpus apparently on the ground that his conviction had been based upon perjured testimony. In view of the plain mandate of the statutes mentioned we find no authority for sustaining this writ. In so holding we have not overlooked the determination made by the United States Supreme Court in Mooney v. Holohan (294 U. S. 103). All concur. (The order dismisses a writ of habeas corpus.) Present — Sears, P. J., Taylor, Thompson, Crosby and Lewis, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
247 A.D. 860, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-hammersmith-v-brophy-nyappdiv-1936.