People v. Couse

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Couse

27 A.D.2d 966, 279 N.Y.S.2d 332, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4335

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

DecidedApril 27, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 27 A.D.2d 966 (People v. Couse) 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. Couse, 27 A.D.2d 966, 279 N.Y.S.2d 332, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4335 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum by the Court. Appeal from an order of the County Court of Chenango County which denied an application in the nature of a writ of error coram nobis, after the hearing for which the matter was remitted as the result of a prior appeal to this court. (Opinion: 26 A D 2d 708.) The documentary evidence, consisting of the Clerk’s minutes, which we held did not “ conclusively rebut appellant’s allegations ” (26 A D 2d 708, 709) so as to sustain the County Court’s denial of a hearing, could nevertheless be given evidentiary effect upon the hearing subsequently conducted and, of course, the County Court was entitled to evaluate the defendant’s testimony and in this case was warranted in finding it incredible. Order affirmed. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur.

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

Memorandum by the Court. Appeal from an order of the County Court of Chenango County which denied an application in the nature of a writ of error coram nobis, after the hearing for which the matter was remitted as the result of a prior appeal to this court. (Opinion: 26 A D 2d 708.) The documentary evidence, consisting of the Clerk’s minutes, which we held did not “ conclusively rebut appellant’s allegations ” (26 A D 2d 708, 709) so as to sustain the County Court’s denial of a hearing, could nevertheless be given evidentiary effect upon the hearing subsequently conducted and, of course, the County Court was entitled to evaluate the defendant’s testimony and in this case was warranted in finding it incredible. Order affirmed. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A.D.2d 966, 279 N.Y.S.2d 332, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4335, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-couse-nyappdiv-1967.