People v. Lambert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lambert

28 A.D.2d 967, 283 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3393

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

DecidedSeptember 21, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 28 A.D.2d 967 (People v. Lambert) 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. Lambert, 28 A.D.2d 967, 283 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3393 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: Appellant and one Hoage in June, 1958 were arraigned in Lewis County Court upon an indictment charging them with burglary, third degree, and petit larceny. They were asked collectively if they had or wanted an attorney. Bach answered in the negative. Hoage had been previously convicted of a misdemeanor and the court stated to him that inasmuch as he had “been in trouble before” a lawyer would be assigned if he was without funds to retain an attorney. No such advice was given to appellant. Both defendants immediately thereafter entered guilty pleas to the indictment and were sentenced to terms of imprisonment. We conclude that appellant was never informed in a “meaningful and effective” manner of the availability of assigned counsel. (Cf. People v. Witenski, 15 N Y 2d 392, 395; People v. Marincic, 2 N Y 2d 181, 184.) Indeed, from what transpired appellant may have been led to believe that assigned counsel was only available to a multiple offender. In passing we note that in May, 1967 the judgment as to Hoage was declared void as having been obtained in violation of his rights under the Federal Constitution by the U. S. District Court, Western District of New York. (Appeal from order of Lewis County Court denying, without a hearing, motion to vacate a judgment of conviction for burglary third and petit larceny entered June 23, 1958.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Henry, Del Veeehio and Marsh, JJ.

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

Memorandum: Appellant and one Hoage in June, 1958 were arraigned in Lewis County Court upon an indictment charging them with burglary, third degree, and petit larceny. They were asked collectively if they had or wanted an attorney. Bach answered in the negative. Hoage had been previously convicted of a misdemeanor and the court stated to him that inasmuch as he had “been in trouble before” a lawyer would be assigned if he was without funds to retain an attorney. No such advice was given to appellant. Both defendants immediately thereafter entered guilty pleas to the indictment and were sentenced to terms of imprisonment. We conclude that appellant was never informed in a “meaningful and effective” manner of the availability of assigned counsel. (Cf. People v. Witenski, 15 N Y 2d 392, 395; People v. Marincic, 2 N Y 2d 181, 184.) Indeed, from what transpired appellant may have been led to believe that assigned counsel was only available to a multiple offender. In passing we note that in May, 1967 the judgment as to Hoage was declared void as having been obtained in violation of his rights under the Federal Constitution by the U. S. District Court, Western District of New York. (Appeal from order of Lewis County Court denying, without a hearing, motion to vacate a judgment of conviction for burglary third and petit larceny entered June 23, 1958.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Henry, Del Veeehio and Marsh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A.D.2d 967, 283 N.Y.S.2d 234, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lambert-nyappdiv-1967.