People v. Beuther

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Beuther

38 A.D.2d 832, 329 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5441

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.2d 832 (People v. Beuther) 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 v. Beuther, 38 A.D.2d 832, 329 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5441 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 9, 1970, which denied the application without a hearing. Order affirmed. In our opinion a hearing was not warranted (People v. White, 309 N. Y. 636). The Criminal Term made sufficient inquiry and took appropriate precautions before accepting the guilty plea (see People v. Serrano, 15 N Y 2d 304, 310). Appellant’s participation resulted in his being indicted for murder. His plea to manslaughter in the first degree was clearly the fruit of calculated self-preservation rather than coerced altruism (see North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U. S. 25). Munder, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Shapiro and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 9, 1970, which denied the application without a hearing. Order affirmed. In our opinion a hearing was not warranted (People v. White, 309 N. Y. 636). The Criminal Term made sufficient inquiry and took appropriate precautions before accepting the guilty plea (see People v. Serrano, 15 N Y 2d 304, 310). Appellant’s participation resulted in his being indicted for murder. His plea to manslaughter in the first degree was clearly the fruit of calculated self-preservation rather than coerced altruism (see North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U. S. 25). Munder, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Shapiro and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.2d 832, 329 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5441, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-beuther-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack