People v. O'Harra

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. O'Harra

19 A.D.2d 688, 241 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3505

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

DecidedJune 27, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.2d 688 (People v. O'Harra) 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. O'Harra, 19 A.D.2d 688, 241 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3505 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendant-appellant was arrested upon a charge of book-making in violation of section 986 of the Penal Law, in the City of Norwich, Chenango Count;', N. Y. He was taken before the County Judge of Chenango County where he waived his right to counsel, the charge was changed to a violation of section 970 of the Penal Law, being a common gambler, and the defendant, without counsel, entered a plea of guilty and was fined $150. Thereafter defendant obtained counsel, made a motion before the County Judge to vacate the judgment of conviction on the ground that the County Judge or the County Court of Chenango County lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter. The motion was denied and from that denial this appeal was taken. Section 56 of the Code of Criminal Procedure expressly grants exclusive jurisdiction of the misdemeanors listed therein to Courts of Special Sessions. A violation of section 986 of the Penal Law, with which the defendant was originally charged, and a violation of section 970 of the same law, to which he pleaded guilty, are misdemeanors listed in subdivision 35-a of section 56. The offense was alleged to have been committed within the City of Norwich. Concededly the City Court of the City of Norwich is a Court of Special Sessions, and the Comity Court, being a court of record, is not a Court of Special Sessions. It is not contended that any certificate of removal under section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was obtained. Absent such a certificate of removal neither the County Court nor the Supreme Court had any jurisdiction over the offense originally charged against defendant or the offense to which he entered a plea of guilty and upon which sentence was imposed. (Code Grim. Pro., § 56; People ex re). Morrison v. Pollack, 264 App. Div. 92, affd. 289 N. Y. 600; People v. Knatt, 156 N. Y. 302; People v. Monahan, 233 App. Div. 16.) Order reversed, upon the law, and the motion granted, the judgment of conviction is vacated and the remission of the fine to the defendant is directed. Bergan, P. J., Coon, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Defendant-appellant was arrested upon a charge of book-making in violation of section 986 of the Penal Law, in the City of Norwich, Chenango Count;', N. Y. He was taken before the County Judge of Chenango County where he waived his right to counsel, the charge was changed to a violation of section 970 of the Penal Law, being a common gambler, and the defendant, without counsel, entered a plea of guilty and was fined $150. Thereafter defendant obtained counsel, made a motion before the County Judge to vacate the judgment of conviction on the ground that the County Judge or the County Court of Chenango County lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter. The motion was denied and from that denial this appeal was taken. Section 56 of the Code of Criminal Procedure expressly grants exclusive jurisdiction of the misdemeanors listed therein to Courts of Special Sessions. A violation of section 986 of the Penal Law, with which the defendant was originally charged, and a violation of section 970 of the same law, to which he pleaded guilty, are misdemeanors listed in subdivision 35-a of section 56. The offense was alleged to have been committed within the City of Norwich. Concededly the City Court of the City of Norwich is a Court of Special Sessions, and the Comity Court, being a court of record, is not a Court of Special Sessions. It is not contended that any certificate of removal under section 57 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was obtained. Absent such a certificate of removal neither the County Court nor the Supreme Court had any jurisdiction over the offense originally charged against defendant or the offense to which he entered a plea of guilty and upon which sentence was imposed. (Code Grim. Pro., § 56; People ex re). Morrison v. Pollack, 264 App. Div. 92, affd. 289 N. Y. 600; People v. Knatt, 156 N. Y. 302; People v. Monahan, 233 App. Div. 16.) Order reversed, upon the law, and the motion granted, the judgment of conviction is vacated and the remission of the fine to the defendant is directed. Bergan, P. J., Coon, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.2d 688, 241 N.Y.S.2d 623, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-oharra-nyappdiv-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack