People v. Mazzella

194 N.E.2d 835, 13 N.Y.2d 997
New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 21, 1963·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

• Order affirmed. While a denial of coram nobis relief is not res judicata as to a subsequent petition on the same grounds, the question whether to entertain such an application is ordinarily one of discretion (Matter of Bojinoff v. People, 299 N. Y. 145; People v. Martine, 303 N. Y. 789). Even when new or additional evidence, is claimed to have been found, the decision whether or not to hold a hearing on the new application is an exercise of judicial discretion (People v. Sullivan, 4 N Y 2d 472). In the' present instance there was no abuse of this discretion.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Foster and Scileppi.

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

People v. Mazzella, 194 N.E.2d 835, 13 N.Y.2d 997 (N.Y. 1963).

194 N.E.2d 835 (People v. Mazzella) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. D'Alessandro
918 N.E.2d 126 (New York Court of Appeals, 2009)
People v. Cortez
158 A.D.2d 611 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Reed v. Follette
268 F. Supp. 936 (S.D. New York, 1967)
United States Ex Rel. Jiggetts v. Follette
260 F. Supp. 301 (S.D. New York, 1966)