People v. Dash

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Dash

208 N.E.2d 171, 16 N.Y.2d 493, 260 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1965 N.Y. LEXIS 1407

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 22, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 208 N.E.2d 171 (People v. Dash) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Dash, 208 N.E.2d 171, 16 N.Y.2d 493, 260 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1965 N.Y. LEXIS 1407 (N.Y. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum : We hold that nothing in Jackson v. Denno (378 U. S. 368) or People v. Huntley (15 N Y 2d 72) requires this court to overrule our decision in People v. Nicholson (11 N Y 2d 1067) whose holding and reasoning we now approve. (See People v. Rogers, 15 N Y 2d 690.) The defendant, therefore, is not now entitled to a hearing before the trial court on the issue of the voluntariness of his confession. Nor has any argument been advanced to justify or warrant any change or modification of our conclusion, in People v. Howard (12 N Y 2d 65, 68-69), that retroactive effect is not to be accorded to decisions of this court respecting right to counsel. (See, also, People v. Rogers, 15 N Y 2d 690, supra.)

We also hold that the defendant has not presented a triable issue on the question of coercion.

The orders appealed from should be affirmed.

Judges Dye, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan concur in Memorandum ; Chief Judge Desmond and Judge Fuld dissent and vote to remand for a hearing since the petition raises a triable issue of fact as to whether the guilty plea was [495]*495induced by coercion (People v. Picciotti, 4 N Y 2d 340; People v. Pearson, 12 N Y 2d 978; People v. Lake, 14 N Y 2d 790; People v. Zilliner, 14 N Y 2d 834).

Orders affirmed.

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

Memorandum : We hold that nothing in Jackson v. Denno (378 U. S. 368) or People v. Huntley (15 N Y 2d 72) requires this court to overrule our decision in People v. Nicholson (11 N Y 2d 1067) whose holding and reasoning we now approve. (See People v. Rogers, 15 N Y 2d 690.) The defendant, therefore, is not now entitled to a hearing before the trial court on the issue of the voluntariness of his confession. Nor has any argument been advanced to justify or warrant any change or modification of our conclusion, in People v. Howard (12 N Y 2d 65, 68-69), that retroactive effect is not to be accorded to decisions of this court respecting right to counsel. (See, also, People v. Rogers, 15 N Y 2d 690, supra.)

We also hold that the defendant has not presented a triable issue on the question of coercion.

The orders appealed from should be affirmed.

Judges Dye, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi and Bergan concur in Memorandum ; Chief Judge Desmond and Judge Fuld dissent and vote to remand for a hearing since the petition raises a triable issue of fact as to whether the guilty plea was [495]*495induced by coercion (People v. Picciotti, 4 N Y 2d 340; People v. Pearson, 12 N Y 2d 978; People v. Lake, 14 N Y 2d 790; People v. Zilliner, 14 N Y 2d 834).

Orders affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 N.E.2d 171, 16 N.Y.2d 493, 260 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1965 N.Y. LEXIS 1407, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dash-ny-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack