People v. Frampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Frampton

31 A.D.2d 551, 295 N.Y.S.2d 393, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2838

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

DecidedNovember 25, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.2d 551 (People v. Frampton) 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. Frampton, 31 A.D.2d 551, 295 N.Y.S.2d 393, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2838 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered February 24, 1967, convicting defendant of murder in the second degree and possession of a weapon, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Case remitted to the trial court for the purpose of holding a hearing to determine defendant’s current sanity. In the event that defendant is sane and capable of understanding the proceedings, a further hearing should be held to determine his sanity at the time of trial and at the time of sentencing. In the interim, the determination of the appeal in this court will be held in abeyance. In our opinion, defendant’s commitment to Dannemora State Hospital six weeks after sentencing raises a question as to his sanity not only at the time of sentencing but also at the time of the trial 10 weeks prior to the commitment (People v. Bangert, 22 N Y 2d 799; People v. Haynes, 30 A D 2d 705; People v. Blando, 29 A D 2d 689; People v. Moore, 21 A D 2d 860). The hearing mandated herein should be held before a Judge other than the one who presided at the trial and with due regard for defendant’s full constitutional rights (People v. Hudson, 19 N Y 2d 137; People v. Jenkins, 29 A D 2d 681). Defendant’s several other contentions have been examined and found to be without merit. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered February 24, 1967, convicting defendant of murder in the second degree and possession of a weapon, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Case remitted to the trial court for the purpose of holding a hearing to determine defendant’s current sanity. In the event that defendant is sane and capable of understanding the proceedings, a further hearing should be held to determine his sanity at the time of trial and at the time of sentencing. In the interim, the determination of the appeal in this court will be held in abeyance. In our opinion, defendant’s commitment to Dannemora State Hospital six weeks after sentencing raises a question as to his sanity not only at the time of sentencing but also at the time of the trial 10 weeks prior to the commitment (People v. Bangert, 22 N Y 2d 799; People v. Haynes, 30 A D 2d 705; People v. Blando, 29 A D 2d 689; People v. Moore, 21 A D 2d 860). The hearing mandated herein should be held before a Judge other than the one who presided at the trial and with due regard for defendant’s full constitutional rights (People v. Hudson, 19 N Y 2d 137; People v. Jenkins, 29 A D 2d 681). Defendant’s several other contentions have been examined and found to be without merit. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.2d 551, 295 N.Y.S.2d 393, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2838, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-frampton-nyappdiv-1968.