People ex rel. LaPore v. Martin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. LaPore v. Martin

263 A.D. 764, 30 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4853

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1941

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 263 A.D. 764 (People ex rel. LaPore v. Martin) 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. LaPore v. Martin, 263 A.D. 764, 30 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4853 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the County Court of Clinton County, entered on May 1, 1941, dismissing a writ of habeas corpus and ordering appellant remanded to the custody of the warden of Clinton Prison at Dannemora, N. Y. On August 3,1925, appellant was sentenced by the County Court of Bronx County to a term of fifteen years in a State prison for the crime of robbery in the first degree. On August 6, 1925, he was sentenced by the County Court of Westchester County to a term of four years in a State prison for the crime of grand larceny in the first degree, with a provision that the latter sentence was not to run concurrently with the sentence imposed by the Bronx County Court. On July 19, 1934, he was released from prison on parole and remained at liberty until December 9, 1934, at which time he was declared delinquent and returned to prison. On December 9, 1935, he was again paroled and remained at liberty until April 28, 1938, when he was again returned to prison as a parole violator. Appellant’s contention seems to be that the two sentences should be considered separately for the purpose of figuring commutation and compensation to which he claims he is entitled. He alleges that inasmuch as the County Court of Westchester County provided that the sentence there imposed was to commence at the expiration of the sentence imposed by the Bronx County Court, he, therefore, commenced service of said four-year sentence on December 30, 1932, and that this four-year sentence fully expired on December 29, 1936. He admits that by reason of his delinquencies while on parole, the fifteen-year term was extended in full. He now urges that both the fifteen-year sentence and the four-year sentence have now expired and that his present restraint is unlawful. It might be pointed out that during a portion of the time when appellant claims he was serving his four-year sentence, he was at liberty on parole. We find no merit in any of appellant’s contentions. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Present — Hill, P. J„ Crapser, Bliss, Heffeman and Schenek, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the County Court of Clinton County, entered on May 1, 1941, dismissing a writ of habeas corpus and ordering appellant remanded to the custody of the warden of Clinton Prison at Dannemora, N. Y. On August 3,1925, appellant was sentenced by the County Court of Bronx County to a term of fifteen years in a State prison for the crime of robbery in the first degree. On August 6, 1925, he was sentenced by the County Court of Westchester County to a term of four years in a State prison for the crime of grand larceny in the first degree, with a provision that the latter sentence was not to run concurrently with the sentence imposed by the Bronx County Court. On July 19, 1934, he was released from prison on parole and remained at liberty until December 9, 1934, at which time he was declared delinquent and returned to prison. On December 9, 1935, he was again paroled and remained at liberty until April 28, 1938, when he was again returned to prison as a parole violator. Appellant’s contention seems to be that the two sentences should be considered separately for the purpose of figuring commutation and compensation to which he claims he is entitled. He alleges that inasmuch as the County Court of Westchester County provided that the sentence there imposed was to commence at the expiration of the sentence imposed by the Bronx County Court, he, therefore, commenced service of said four-year sentence on December 30, 1932, and that this four-year sentence fully expired on December 29, 1936. He admits that by reason of his delinquencies while on parole, the fifteen-year term was extended in full. He now urges that both the fifteen-year sentence and the four-year sentence have now expired and that his present restraint is unlawful. It might be pointed out that during a portion of the time when appellant claims he was serving his four-year sentence, he was at liberty on parole. We find no merit in any of appellant’s contentions. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Present — Hill, P. J„ Crapser, Bliss, Heffeman and Schenek, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D. 764, 30 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4853, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-lapore-v-martin-nyappdiv-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack