People v. Hicks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hicks

26 A.D.2d 906, 274 N.Y.S.2d 430

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

DecidedOctober 27, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 906 (People v. Hicks) 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. Hicks, 26 A.D.2d 906, 274 N.Y.S.2d 430 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed and matter remitted to Erie County Court for a hearing. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of robbery, second .degree, in March, T955, upon his plea of guilty. He now seeks eoram nobis relief and alleges that his plea was induced by coercion and duress in that his wife was arrested and both she and appellant were threatened that she would be imprisoned unless defendant entered a guilty plea. Acting on these threats, it is alleged appellant changed his plea to guilty. The former determination of County Court made in July, 1965, was not reviewed by this court and is not binding on us. The issues presented should be the subject of a hearing where appellant should be represented by counsel if he malíes a proper request therefor. (Appeal from order of Erie County Court denying, without a hearing, motion to vacate a judgment of conviction for robbery, second degree, rendered May 2, 1955.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Del Vecchio and Marsh, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed and matter remitted to Erie County Court for a hearing. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of robbery, second .degree, in March, T955, upon his plea of guilty. He now seeks eoram nobis relief and alleges that his plea was induced by coercion and duress in that his wife was arrested and both she and appellant were threatened that she would be imprisoned unless defendant entered a guilty plea. Acting on these threats, it is alleged appellant changed his plea to guilty. The former determination of County Court made in July, 1965, was not reviewed by this court and is not binding on us. The issues presented should be the subject of a hearing where appellant should be represented by counsel if he malíes a proper request therefor. (Appeal from order of Erie County Court denying, without a hearing, motion to vacate a judgment of conviction for robbery, second degree, rendered May 2, 1955.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Del Vecchio and Marsh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 906, 274 N.Y.S.2d 430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hicks-nyappdiv-1966.