People v. Holland
This text of 279 A.D. 1098 (People v. Holland) 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
In our opinion this was error. Appellant’s plea of guilty and consequent conviction in the Federal court did not necessarily establish that the act involved was in any way connected with prostitution or other commercialized vice proscribed by section 2460 of the Penal Law of this State. (Cf. Caminetti v. United States, 242 U. S. 470; Cleveland v. United States, 329 U. S. 14; People v. Draper, 169 App. Div. 479.) Appellant’s sentence as a second offender was, consequently, improper. (People v. Olah, 300 N. Y. 96; People v. Gailhard, 278 App. Div. 712.) Adel, J., concurs with Nolan, P. J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
279 A.D. 1098, 113 N.Y.S.2d 461, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5970, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-holland-nyappdiv-1952.