People ex rel. Logan v. McMann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Logan v. McMann

24 A.D.2d 919, 264 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2962

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

DecidedNovember 23, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 919 (People ex rel. Logan v. McMann) 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. Logan v. McMann, 24 A.D.2d 919, 264 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2962 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Herlihy, J.

Appeal from a judgment denying a writ of habeas corpus. The only issue within the framework of the petition and decided by the court concerned adjourning the proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court during which time the Grand Jury handed up an indictment which superseded the proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court and as alleged by the petitioner, denied him the opportunity of appearing before the Grand Jury. From our examination of the papers we are unable to ascertain how the petitioner suffered any deprivation of due process. The other arguments in the brief of the petitioner, raised for the first time on this appeal, arc not properly before the court and accordingly not considered. Judgment affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

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

Herlihy, J.

Appeal from a judgment denying a writ of habeas corpus. The only issue within the framework of the petition and decided by the court concerned adjourning the proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court during which time the Grand Jury handed up an indictment which superseded the proceedings in the Magistrates’ Court and as alleged by the petitioner, denied him the opportunity of appearing before the Grand Jury. From our examination of the papers we are unable to ascertain how the petitioner suffered any deprivation of due process. The other arguments in the brief of the petitioner, raised for the first time on this appeal, arc not properly before the court and accordingly not considered. Judgment affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 919, 264 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2962, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-logan-v-mcmann-nyappdiv-1965.