People v. Gould
This text of 29 A.D.2d 668 (People v. Gould) 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.
Opinion
Upon defendant’s notice of appeal which states that the appeal is from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County, rendered March 4, 1964, this court treats the appeal as from the resentencing judgment rendered by said court on November 10, 1966 (Code Grim. Pro., § 524-c). Action remitted to the trial court for the purpose of a hearing to be held and a determination to be made, by a Judge other than the Trial Judge, on the issue of defendant’s sanity at the time of trial. If it is found defendant was not sane at that time, a new trial should be ordered; if the contrary is found, the judgment should be affirmed (People v. Gonzales, 20 N Y 2d 289, 293-294; People v. Hudson, 19 N Y 2d 137; Pate v. Robinson, 383 U. S. 375, 378; People v. Gomez, 28 A D 2d 737). In line with the procedure indicated (see People v. Gonzales, supra), the hearing should be held before a Judge other than the Trial Judge so that the latter can be called upon to testify concerning his observations of defendant at the time of the trial. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Munder, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 A.D.2d 668, 287 N.Y.S.2d 875, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4864, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gould-nyappdiv-1968.