People ex rel. Singfield v. Jackson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Singfield v. Jackson

7 A.D.2d 668, 179 N.Y.S.2d 113, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4313

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

DecidedNovember 10, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 7 A.D.2d 668 (People ex rel. Singfield 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. Singfield v. Jackson, 7 A.D.2d 668, 179 N.Y.S.2d 113, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4313 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of County Court, Clinton County, which dismissed a writ of habeas corpus. Relator was convicted in the Kings County Court on his plea of guilty of the felony of possession of narcotics with intent to sell. He challenges that conviction by writ of habeas corpus in Clinton County where he is serving a prison sentence under the judgment of conviction. The writ was properly dismissed. The Kings County Court had jurisdiction of the offense; the indictment sufficiently alleges the crime; relator was represented by counsel and pleaded guilty. On this proceeding he alleges that counsel did not competently represent him; that his constitutional rights were violated by an unlawful search and seizure of the narcotics at the time of his arrest; and that he was not advised of his rights to counsel on the preliminary hearing before a magistrate. These issues are not examined by the writ of habeas corpus. To the extent that any of them may require determination, they should be addressed directly to the sentencing court. Order affirmed. Bergan, J. P., Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order of County Court, Clinton County, which dismissed a writ of habeas corpus. Relator was convicted in the Kings County Court on his plea of guilty of the felony of possession of narcotics with intent to sell. He challenges that conviction by writ of habeas corpus in Clinton County where he is serving a prison sentence under the judgment of conviction. The writ was properly dismissed. The Kings County Court had jurisdiction of the offense; the indictment sufficiently alleges the crime; relator was represented by counsel and pleaded guilty. On this proceeding he alleges that counsel did not competently represent him; that his constitutional rights were violated by an unlawful search and seizure of the narcotics at the time of his arrest; and that he was not advised of his rights to counsel on the preliminary hearing before a magistrate. These issues are not examined by the writ of habeas corpus. To the extent that any of them may require determination, they should be addressed directly to the sentencing court. Order affirmed. Bergan, J. P., Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 A.D.2d 668, 179 N.Y.S.2d 113, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-singfield-v-jackson-nyappdiv-1958.