People v. Cookingham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cookingham

4 A.D.2d 913, 167 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4312

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

DecidedOctober 19, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 4 A.D.2d 913 (People v. Cookingham) 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. Cookingham, 4 A.D.2d 913, 167 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4312 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Schenectady County Court which denied appellant’s application for relief under a writ of error coram nobis. On May 18, 1954 appellant was convicted upon a plea of guilty of the crime of grand larceny in the second degree. He was arraigned as a second felony offender under an information filed by the District Attorney of Schenectady County. This information charged, and there is no dispute about the facts, that theretofore and on May 15, 1940 appellant was convicted of grand larceny in the second degree and given a suspended sentence of from two and one-half to five years in prison; and also placed on probation for five years. For the purpose of imposing sentence as a second offender a suspended sentence shall be regarded as a conviction (Code Crim. Pro., § 470-b). Apparently the only contention raised by appellant is that the district attorney was required to proceed by indictment instead of by information in pleading a second offense. This contention is without merit (People v. Hunter, 3 A D 2d 926; Penal Law, § 1943). Counsel assigned to act for appellant has brought to our attention every conceivable argument in favor of appellant, and has performed his duty conscientiously. Order unanimously affirmed. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Gibson, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the Schenectady County Court which denied appellant’s application for relief under a writ of error coram nobis. On May 18, 1954 appellant was convicted upon a plea of guilty of the crime of grand larceny in the second degree. He was arraigned as a second felony offender under an information filed by the District Attorney of Schenectady County. This information charged, and there is no dispute about the facts, that theretofore and on May 15, 1940 appellant was convicted of grand larceny in the second degree and given a suspended sentence of from two and one-half to five years in prison; and also placed on probation for five years. For the purpose of imposing sentence as a second offender a suspended sentence shall be regarded as a conviction (Code Crim. Pro., § 470-b). Apparently the only contention raised by appellant is that the district attorney was required to proceed by indictment instead of by information in pleading a second offense. This contention is without merit (People v. Hunter, 3 A D 2d 926; Penal Law, § 1943). Counsel assigned to act for appellant has brought to our attention every conceivable argument in favor of appellant, and has performed his duty conscientiously. Order unanimously affirmed. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Gibson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.2d 913, 167 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cookingham-nyappdiv-1957.