People v. Catapano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Catapano

73 A.D.2d 975, 424 N.Y.S.2d 242, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9914

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1980

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 73 A.D.2d 975 (People v. Catapano) 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. Catapano, 73 A.D.2d 975, 424 N.Y.S.2d 242, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered April 27, 1979, convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, upon a plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Case remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, to hear and report on the issue of defendant’s mental capacity at the time of his plea and sentence, and appeal held in abeyance in the interim. Defendant’s history of confinement to State mental institutions, as indicated in the presentence report, was such as to require the sentencing court to make some inquiry into defendant’s mental capacity prior to imposing sentence, whether or not that issue had been raised by counsel (see People v Armlin, 37 NY2d 167; People v Bangert, 22 NY2d 799; People v Boundy, 10 NY2d 518). Mangano, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Margett, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered April 27, 1979, convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, upon a plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Case remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, to hear and report on the issue of defendant’s mental capacity at the time of his plea and sentence, and appeal held in abeyance in the interim. Defendant’s history of confinement to State mental institutions, as indicated in the presentence report, was such as to require the sentencing court to make some inquiry into defendant’s mental capacity prior to imposing sentence, whether or not that issue had been raised by counsel (see People v Armlin, 37 NY2d 167; People v Bangert, 22 NY2d 799; People v Boundy, 10 NY2d 518). Mangano, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Margett, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 A.D.2d 975, 424 N.Y.S.2d 242, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9914, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-catapano-nyappdiv-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack