People ex rel. Pizarro v. Henderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Pizarro v. Henderson

41 A.D.2d 591, 340 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5303

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

DecidedJanuary 18, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 41 A.D.2d 591 (People ex rel. Pizarro v. Henderson) 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. Pizarro v. Henderson, 41 A.D.2d 591, 340 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5303 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Relator challenges, by an application for habeas corpus, his sentence of 9 to 10 years for assault in the second degree for an attempt to commit the crime of rape as a felony because he was not afforded the psychiatric examination required under section 2189-a of the old Penal Law. The record reveals that relator is presently serving concurrent terms of 20 to 30 years on each of two counts of robbery in the first degree and 12 to 14 years on one count of robbery in the first degree. These convictions are not challenged in this proceeding. Habeas corpus is not an appropriate remedy because these unchallenged longer concurrent sentences conclusively show that relator’s detention is lawful. [592]*592(Appeal from judgment of Cayuga County Court dismissing writ of habeas corpus.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Marsh, Witmer, Moule and Cardamone, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Relator challenges, by an application for habeas corpus, his sentence of 9 to 10 years for assault in the second degree for an attempt to commit the crime of rape as a felony because he was not afforded the psychiatric examination required under section 2189-a of the old Penal Law. The record reveals that relator is presently serving concurrent terms of 20 to 30 years on each of two counts of robbery in the first degree and 12 to 14 years on one count of robbery in the first degree. These convictions are not challenged in this proceeding. Habeas corpus is not an appropriate remedy because these unchallenged longer concurrent sentences conclusively show that relator’s detention is lawful. [592]*592(Appeal from judgment of Cayuga County Court dismissing writ of habeas corpus.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Marsh, Witmer, Moule and Cardamone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.2d 591, 340 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-pizarro-v-henderson-nyappdiv-1973.