People v. Dacajewiah

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dacajewiah

49 A.D.2d 1036, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11402

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

DecidedOctober 31, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.2d 1036 (People v. Dacajewiah) 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. Dacajewiah, 49 A.D.2d 1036, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11402 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Motions for a hearing on issue of selective enforcement denied in accordance with the following memorandum: We have two separate motions. One is by John Hill for a remand directing Justice King to hold a hearing on selective enforcement. The other is by Charles Pernasilice to join in that motion. We grant Charles Pernasilice’s motion to join in John Hill’s application but deny the motion for a hearing on selective enforcement. The application to make the proceeding before Justice Mikol in People v Jomo, relating to selective enforcement, a part of their record on appeal from their judgments [1037]*1037of conviction should be addressed to the court in which they were convicted. Present—Marsh, P. J., Moule, Goldman, Del Vecchio and Witmer, JJ.

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

Motions for a hearing on issue of selective enforcement denied in accordance with the following memorandum: We have two separate motions. One is by John Hill for a remand directing Justice King to hold a hearing on selective enforcement. The other is by Charles Pernasilice to join in that motion. We grant Charles Pernasilice’s motion to join in John Hill’s application but deny the motion for a hearing on selective enforcement. The application to make the proceeding before Justice Mikol in People v Jomo, relating to selective enforcement, a part of their record on appeal from their judgments [1037]*1037of conviction should be addressed to the court in which they were convicted. Present—Marsh, P. J., Moule, Goldman, Del Vecchio and Witmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.2d 1036, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dacajewiah-nyappdiv-1975.