People ex rel. Muniz v. Rikers Correctional Facility

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Muniz v. Rikers Correctional Facility

209 A.D.2d 734, 619 N.Y.S.2d 681

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

DecidedNovember 28, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 209 A.D.2d 734 (People ex rel. Muniz v. Rikers Correctional Facility) 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. Muniz v. Rikers Correctional Facility, 209 A.D.2d 734, 619 N.Y.S.2d 681 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

— Writ of habeas corpus in the nature of an application to set bail upon Queens County Indictment No. 5140/94.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and after hearing oral argument in support thereof and in opposition thereto, it is

Adjudged that the writ is sustained, without costs or dis[735]*735bursements, to the extent of setting bail on Queens County Indictment No. 5140/94 in the sum of $250,000, which may be posted in the form of an insurance company bail bond in that sum or by depositing the same sum as a cash bail alternative.

Under the circumstances of this case, we find that the denial of bail to George Shaw was an improvident exercise of discretion. Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

— Writ of habeas corpus in the nature of an application to set bail upon Queens County Indictment No. 5140/94.

Upon the papers filed in support of the application and after hearing oral argument in support thereof and in opposition thereto, it is

Adjudged that the writ is sustained, without costs or dis[735]*735bursements, to the extent of setting bail on Queens County Indictment No. 5140/94 in the sum of $250,000, which may be posted in the form of an insurance company bail bond in that sum or by depositing the same sum as a cash bail alternative.

Under the circumstances of this case, we find that the denial of bail to George Shaw was an improvident exercise of discretion. Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 734, 619 N.Y.S.2d 681, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-muniz-v-rikers-correctional-facility-nyappdiv-1994.