People ex rel. Singleton v. Hanley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Singleton v. Hanley

252 A.D. 566, 300 N.Y.S. 207, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5729

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

DecidedDecember 3, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 252 A.D. 566 (People ex rel. Singleton v. Hanley) 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. Singleton v. Hanley, 252 A.D. 566, 300 N.Y.S. 207, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5729 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The court in this case did not delete from the form of the sentence, but allowed to remain therein immediately after the words “Fined $100,” the following alternative provision: “ or in default of payment, imprisonment not to exceed-day in City Prison.” The court, however, did not fill in the blank. The sentence was neither void nor invalid but at most irregular on its face, and there being a valid judgment of conviction the writ of habeas corpus should not have been sustained but the prisoner should have been returned for resentence to the proper court.

Accordingly the order appealed from should be reversed, the writ of habeas corpus dismissed, and relator remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Bronx county for resentence by the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York.

Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Doee and Cohn, JJ.

Order unanimously reversed, the writ of habeas corpus dismissed, and the relator remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Bronx county for resentence by the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York.

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

Per Curiam.

The court in this case did not delete from the form of the sentence, but allowed to remain therein immediately after the words “Fined $100,” the following alternative provision: “ or in default of payment, imprisonment not to exceed-day in City Prison.” The court, however, did not fill in the blank. The sentence was neither void nor invalid but at most irregular on its face, and there being a valid judgment of conviction the writ of habeas corpus should not have been sustained but the prisoner should have been returned for resentence to the proper court.

Accordingly the order appealed from should be reversed, the writ of habeas corpus dismissed, and relator remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Bronx county for resentence by the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York.

Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Doee and Cohn, JJ.

Order unanimously reversed, the writ of habeas corpus dismissed, and the relator remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Bronx county for resentence by the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 A.D. 566, 300 N.Y.S. 207, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5729, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-singleton-v-hanley-nyappdiv-1937.