People ex rel. Pearson v. La Vallee

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Pearson v. La Vallee

13 A.D.2d 560

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

DecidedMarch 9, 1961

StatusPublished

This text of 13 A.D.2d 560 (People ex rel. Pearson v. La Vallee) 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. Pearson v. La Vallee, 13 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from an order dismissing a writ of habeas corpus which alleged the appellant was not properly advised pursuant to section 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Appellant’s first contention is that he was required to answer questions propounded pursuant to section 480 before being questioned as to his waiving the statutory requirement under section 472. We find this contention to be without merit. He next contends that after being charged with an information pursuant to' section 1943 of the Penal Law, he should have again been questioned in accordance with section 480. The defendant was represented by counsel in all stages of the proceedings, all of which took place on the same date and in continuity and to which no objection was made by the appellant or his counsel. Under the circumstances, he was sufficiently apprised of his rights. Order unanimously affirmed.

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

— Appeal from an order dismissing a writ of habeas corpus which alleged the appellant was not properly advised pursuant to section 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Appellant’s first contention is that he was required to answer questions propounded pursuant to section 480 before being questioned as to his waiving the statutory requirement under section 472. We find this contention to be without merit. He next contends that after being charged with an information pursuant to' section 1943 of the Penal Law, he should have again been questioned in accordance with section 480. The defendant was represented by counsel in all stages of the proceedings, all of which took place on the same date and in continuity and to which no objection was made by the appellant or his counsel. Under the circumstances, he was sufficiently apprised of his rights. Order unanimously affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.2d 560, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-pearson-v-la-vallee-nyappdiv-1961.