People v. Eubanks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Eubanks

31 A.D.2d 753, 297 N.Y.S.2d 495, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4802

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.2d 753 (People v. Eubanks) 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. Eubanks, 31 A.D.2d 753, 297 N.Y.S.2d 495, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4802 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme 'Court, Kings County, dated February 15, 1967, which, without a hearing, denied his application. Appeal dismissed. Defendant alleges that he was deprived of his right to the allocution provided by section 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is well settled that the remedy of coram nobis does not lie for an alleged failure to comply with section 480 (People v. Sullivan, 3 N Y 2d 196; People v. Soviero, 27 A D 2d 548; People v. Kadin, 23 A D 2d 699; see People v. Koehler, 30 A D 2d 547). Our decision in People v. Sagistiano (28 A D 2d 728) was not intended as a departure from the holding.in People v. Sullivan (supra).— Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme 'Court, Kings County, dated February 15, 1967, which, without a hearing, denied his application. Appeal dismissed. Defendant alleges that he was deprived of his right to the allocution provided by section 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is well settled that the remedy of coram nobis does not lie for an alleged failure to comply with section 480 (People v. Sullivan, 3 N Y 2d 196; People v. Soviero, 27 A D 2d 548; People v. Kadin, 23 A D 2d 699; see People v. Koehler, 30 A D 2d 547). Our decision in People v. Sagistiano (28 A D 2d 728) was not intended as a departure from the holding.in People v. Sullivan (supra).— Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.2d 753, 297 N.Y.S.2d 495, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4802, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-eubanks-nyappdiv-1969.