People ex rel. Taylor v. Warden Rikers Island Correctional Facility

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Taylor v. Warden Rikers Island Correctional Facility

50 A.D.3d 282, 853 N.Y.S.2d 882

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

DecidedApril 1, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.3d 282 (People ex rel. Taylor v. Warden Rikers Island 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. Taylor v. Warden Rikers Island Correctional Facility, 50 A.D.3d 282, 853 N.Y.S.2d 882 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Brenda Soloff, J.), entered December 18, 2006, denying petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus and dismissing the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the record is sufficient to permit review. While petitioner alleged a violation of CEL 180.80, it is clear from the face of the petition that petitioner’s lawyer had waived the requirement that a hearing be held within 144 hours of petitioner’s arrest (see CEL 180.80 [1]). In any event, even if there had been a CEL 180.80 violation at the inception of the underlying criminal case, that would not presently entitle petitioner to release. Concur—Gonzalez, J.E, Williams, Catterson and Moskowitz, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Brenda Soloff, J.), entered December 18, 2006, denying petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus and dismissing the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the record is sufficient to permit review. While petitioner alleged a violation of CEL 180.80, it is clear from the face of the petition that petitioner’s lawyer had waived the requirement that a hearing be held within 144 hours of petitioner’s arrest (see CEL 180.80 [1]). In any event, even if there had been a CEL 180.80 violation at the inception of the underlying criminal case, that would not presently entitle petitioner to release. Concur—Gonzalez, J.E, Williams, Catterson and Moskowitz, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.3d 282, 853 N.Y.S.2d 882, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-taylor-v-warden-rikers-island-correctional-facility-nyappdiv-2008.