People v. Coldiron

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Coldiron

79 Misc. 2d 338, 360 N.Y.S.2d 788

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedOctober 23, 1974

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 79 Misc. 2d 338 (People v. Coldiron) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court 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. Coldiron, 79 Misc. 2d 338, 360 N.Y.S.2d 788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Memobandum. Order unanimously reversed on the law and information reinstated.

In our opinion, the failure to place above deponent’s signature the form notice advising deponent of his criminal liability, pursuant to Penal Law (§ 210.45), did not render the verification of the information defective. While the information must be subscribed, this merely requires that deponent’s signature be at the conclusion of the statement being verified but does not require such signature to also follow the form notice. Concededly, it would be better practice to have the form notice immediately beneath the statement being verified and directly above deponent’s signature so as to forcefully call the criminal penalty for making false statements to deponent’s attention (see 1 Waxner, New York Criminal Practice, ][ 2.8). However, the placing of the notice below deponent’s signature, as done on the New York State Police form used as an information here, is sufficient to constitute a verification pursuant to CPL 100.30 (subd. 1, par. [d]).

Concur ■ — ■ Glickman, P. J., Pittoni and Fabley, JJ.

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

Memobandum. Order unanimously reversed on the law and information reinstated.

In our opinion, the failure to place above deponent’s signature the form notice advising deponent of his criminal liability, pursuant to Penal Law (§ 210.45), did not render the verification of the information defective. While the information must be subscribed, this merely requires that deponent’s signature be at the conclusion of the statement being verified but does not require such signature to also follow the form notice. Concededly, it would be better practice to have the form notice immediately beneath the statement being verified and directly above deponent’s signature so as to forcefully call the criminal penalty for making false statements to deponent’s attention (see 1 Waxner, New York Criminal Practice, ][ 2.8). However, the placing of the notice below deponent’s signature, as done on the New York State Police form used as an information here, is sufficient to constitute a verification pursuant to CPL 100.30 (subd. 1, par. [d]).

Concur ■ — ■ Glickman, P. J., Pittoni and Fabley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 Misc. 2d 338, 360 N.Y.S.2d 788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-coldiron-nyappterm-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack