People ex rel. Mainieri v. Jackson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Mainieri v. Jackson

11 A.D.2d 546, 200 N.Y.S.2d 235, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10177

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

DecidedMay 5, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 11 A.D.2d 546 (People ex rel. Mainieri v. Jackson) 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. Mainieri v. Jackson, 11 A.D.2d 546, 200 N.Y.S.2d 235, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10177 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the County Court of Clinton County, which denied an application for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition was defective in that it was not verified and in other respects did not completely comply with section 1234 of the Civil Practice Act, and accordingly the order must be affirmed. We do not, however, agree with the County Court’s conclusion that even if the petition were sufficient in form it would have to be dismissed because, in that court’s view, the transcript of proceedings attached to the petition refutes relator’s contention that upon his prior felony conviction in 1920 the sentencing court did not comply with section 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If the transcript is correct, the question required by section 480 was propounded after rendition of a jury verdict finding relator guilty of two crimes. The transcript indicates that on the same day the verdict was set aside, that relator immediately pleaded guilty to one of the crimes, and that the question required by section 480 was not again asked before imposition of sentence. We do not, of course, pass upon the legal problem which a complete record might present, but we do consider that upon a new and proper application a hearing might well be warranted. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, 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, which denied an application for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition was defective in that it was not verified and in other respects did not completely comply with section 1234 of the Civil Practice Act, and accordingly the order must be affirmed. We do not, however, agree with the County Court’s conclusion that even if the petition were sufficient in form it would have to be dismissed because, in that court’s view, the transcript of proceedings attached to the petition refutes relator’s contention that upon his prior felony conviction in 1920 the sentencing court did not comply with section 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. If the transcript is correct, the question required by section 480 was propounded after rendition of a jury verdict finding relator guilty of two crimes. The transcript indicates that on the same day the verdict was set aside, that relator immediately pleaded guilty to one of the crimes, and that the question required by section 480 was not again asked before imposition of sentence. We do not, of course, pass upon the legal problem which a complete record might present, but we do consider that upon a new and proper application a hearing might well be warranted. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.2d 546, 200 N.Y.S.2d 235, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-mainieri-v-jackson-nyappdiv-1960.