People v. Mojica

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mojica

33 A.D.2d 914, 307 N.Y.S.2d 578, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5788

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

DecidedJanuary 12, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 33 A.D.2d 914 (People v. Mojica) 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. Mojica, 33 A.D.2d 914, 307 N.Y.S.2d 578, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 12, 1969, which denied the application, without a hearing. Order reversed, on the law, and application remitted to said court for a hearing, to be held before another Justice. The findings .of fact below have not been considered. In our opinion the record does not conclusively refute defendant’s allegation that a promise was made to him by the trial court on March 10, 1967, when he pleaded guilty to a lesser crime. We find there is, as a matter of law, a dispute of fact which entitles him to a hearing (see People v. White, 309 N. Y. 636, 641; People v. Guariglia, 303 N. Y. 338, 343). Christ, Acting P. J., Benjamin, Munder, Martuscello and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

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

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 12, 1969, which denied the application, without a hearing. Order reversed, on the law, and application remitted to said court for a hearing, to be held before another Justice. The findings .of fact below have not been considered. In our opinion the record does not conclusively refute defendant’s allegation that a promise was made to him by the trial court on March 10, 1967, when he pleaded guilty to a lesser crime. We find there is, as a matter of law, a dispute of fact which entitles him to a hearing (see People v. White, 309 N. Y. 636, 641; People v. Guariglia, 303 N. Y. 338, 343). Christ, Acting P. J., Benjamin, Munder, Martuscello and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 914, 307 N.Y.S.2d 578, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mojica-nyappdiv-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack