People v. James

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. James

26 A.D.2d 531, 271 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3989

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

DecidedJune 16, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 531 (People v. James) 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. James, 26 A.D.2d 531, 271 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3989 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered November 5, 1964, denying without hearing, defendant’s motion to vacate a judgment of conviction for robbery in the first degree on grounds in the nature of error coram nobis, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the motion granted to the extent of remanding the matter to the Supreme Court, New York County, before Mr. Justice Schweitzer, for a hearing and determination (with findings of fact and conclusions of law), on the issue of the voluntariness of defendant’s confessions received in evidence at the trial, and thereafter, to enter such order as may be appropriate to the determination. The voluntariness of defendant’s confession was in issue on the trial which resulted in the judgment of conviction. Since the proceedings in connection with that judgment were concluded before the determination in Jackson v. Denno (378 U. S. 368) there must be a hearing (People v. Huntley, 15 N Y 2d 72, 77-78). Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Eager and Bastow, JJ.

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

Order, entered November 5, 1964, denying without hearing, defendant’s motion to vacate a judgment of conviction for robbery in the first degree on grounds in the nature of error coram nobis, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the motion granted to the extent of remanding the matter to the Supreme Court, New York County, before Mr. Justice Schweitzer, for a hearing and determination (with findings of fact and conclusions of law), on the issue of the voluntariness of defendant’s confessions received in evidence at the trial, and thereafter, to enter such order as may be appropriate to the determination. The voluntariness of defendant’s confession was in issue on the trial which resulted in the judgment of conviction. Since the proceedings in connection with that judgment were concluded before the determination in Jackson v. Denno (378 U. S. 368) there must be a hearing (People v. Huntley, 15 N Y 2d 72, 77-78). Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Eager and Bastow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 531, 271 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3989, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-james-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack