People v. Lancaster

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lancaster

34 A.D.2d 727, 311 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5151

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

DecidedApril 9, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 34 A.D.2d 727 (People v. Lancaster) 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. Lancaster, 34 A.D.2d 727, 311 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5151 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and action remitted to Onondaga County Court for a jury trial. Memorandum: Appellant was 17 years old when indicted for grand larceny, third degree. While represented by counsel, appellant signed a consent to be treated as a youthful offender and after investigation he was determined to be eligible for such treat[728]*728ment. Upon arraignment he was informed that having consented to youthful offender treatment he was entitled to a trial but without a jury. Appellant then pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a reformatory period of imprisonment up to four years. This appeal presents the same issue decided by this court in the case of People v. Sawyer (33 A D 2d 242). The opinion in Sawyer (p. 245) fully sets forth our reasoning and cites the authorities upon which we rely in holding that “ Appellant was effectively denied that right [trial by jury] when he in substance was required to consent to a nonjury trial as a prerequisite to consideration for adjudication as a youthful offender.” This denial of his constitutional right to a jury trial for a serious crime requires a reversal of appellant’s conviction. (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga County Court adjudging defendant a youthful offender.) Present—Goldman, P. J., Witmer, Gabrielli, Moule and Bastow, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and action remitted to Onondaga County Court for a jury trial. Memorandum: Appellant was 17 years old when indicted for grand larceny, third degree. While represented by counsel, appellant signed a consent to be treated as a youthful offender and after investigation he was determined to be eligible for such treat[728]*728ment. Upon arraignment he was informed that having consented to youthful offender treatment he was entitled to a trial but without a jury. Appellant then pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a reformatory period of imprisonment up to four years. This appeal presents the same issue decided by this court in the case of People v. Sawyer (33 A D 2d 242). The opinion in Sawyer (p. 245) fully sets forth our reasoning and cites the authorities upon which we rely in holding that “ Appellant was effectively denied that right [trial by jury] when he in substance was required to consent to a nonjury trial as a prerequisite to consideration for adjudication as a youthful offender.” This denial of his constitutional right to a jury trial for a serious crime requires a reversal of appellant’s conviction. (Appeal from judgment of Onondaga County Court adjudging defendant a youthful offender.) Present—Goldman, P. J., Witmer, Gabrielli, Moule and Bastow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.2d 727, 311 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lancaster-nyappdiv-1970.