People v. Cuomo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cuomo

271 A.D.2d 956

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

DecidedFebruary 14, 1947

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 956 (People v. Cuomo) 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. Cuomo, 271 A.D.2d 956 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal (1) from a judgment of a Court of Special Sessions held by a City Magistrate of the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan, rendered July 19, 1946, upon a plea of guilty to a charge of violation of section 315 of the Sanitary Code of the City of New York, and (2) from an order of said court entered July 29, 1946, which denied an application by defendant for permission to withdraw a plea of guilty and to enter a plea of not guilty to said charge.

Per Curiam.

The defendant having pleaded guilty with an explanation, the court should have inquired more fully into the facts which the defendant attempted to state. The record before us discloses that had such inquiry been made, facts in mitigation -would have been revealed warranting the imposition of a lesser penalty than that imposed. Under the circumstances, the judgment appealed from should be modified to the extent of reducing the fine to $25 and otherwise affirmed.

Martin, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Van Yoorhis, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously modified by reducing the fine to $25 and as so modified affirmed.

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

Appeal (1) from a judgment of a Court of Special Sessions held by a City Magistrate of the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan, rendered July 19, 1946, upon a plea of guilty to a charge of violation of section 315 of the Sanitary Code of the City of New York, and (2) from an order of said court entered July 29, 1946, which denied an application by defendant for permission to withdraw a plea of guilty and to enter a plea of not guilty to said charge.

Per Curiam.

The defendant having pleaded guilty with an explanation, the court should have inquired more fully into the facts which the defendant attempted to state. The record before us discloses that had such inquiry been made, facts in mitigation -would have been revealed warranting the imposition of a lesser penalty than that imposed. Under the circumstances, the judgment appealed from should be modified to the extent of reducing the fine to $25 and otherwise affirmed.

Martin, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Van Yoorhis, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously modified by reducing the fine to $25 and as so modified affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 956, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cuomo-nyappdiv-1947.