People v. Kealey

307 N.E.2d 564, 33 N.Y.2d 897, 352 N.Y.S.2d 449, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 916
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Kealey. Read the opinion of the Court — 33 N.Y.2d 818
New York Court of Appeals·Decided December 27, 1973·Published

Opinion

Motion to amend remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended by adding thereto the following; Upon appeal herein there was presented and necessarily passed upon the following question under the Constitution of the United States, viz.: Defendant-appellant argued that he had been denied due process of law because the statute under which he was convicted (Penal Law, § 125.10) is unconstitutionally vague. The Court of Appeals held that appellant’s constitutional rights were not violated. [See 33 N Y 2d 818.]

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

People v. Kealey, 307 N.E.2d 564, 33 N.Y.2d 897, 352 N.Y.S.2d 449, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 916 (N.Y. 1973).

307 N.E.2d 564 (People v. Kealey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.