People v. Pendergrass

43 A.D.2d 592, 349 N.Y.S.2d 768, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3080
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 26, 1973
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 43 A.D.2d 592 (People v. Pendergrass) 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. Pendergrass, 43 A.D.2d 592, 349 N.Y.S.2d 768, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3080 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Opinion

Appeal by defendant (by permission) from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated February 29, 1972, which denied his application for a writ of error coram nobis, without a hearing. Order reversed, on the law, and proceeding remitted to the Criminal Term for a hearing and a new determination in accordance with the views herein set forth. Defendant brought this proceeding to vacate a judgment which had convicted him of manslaughter in the first degree, alleging that the Trial Justice, the. prosecutor and his assigned defense counsel coerced his plea of guilty by threatening a heavier sentence if he were convicted after trial. Defendant also alleged that his plea of guilty was entered on the mistaken belief that the court would sentence him to a drug rehabilitation program rather than to a term in prison. Defendant’s application was referred to the Trial Justice, who thereafter denied the relief requested without a hearing. It is our opinion that since defendant alleged an impropriety on the part of the Trial Justice, the proceeding should have been referred to another Justice for determination. We are also of the view that defendant’s allegations presented serious questions of fact which could be resolved only after a hearing (People v. Picdotti, 4 N Y 2d 340; People v. Granello, 18 N Y 2d 823, 824). Accordingly, the [593]*593proceeding must be remitted to the Criminal Term for a hearing and a new determination. Since the Trial Justice is a potential witness, the hearing should be held before another Justice (People v. Holley.; 28 A D 2d 544). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Shapiro, Christ and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Carla T. v. Brian T.
2023 NY Slip Op 06572 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People v. Alomar
711 N.E.2d 958 (New York Court of Appeals, 1999)
People v. Montello
247 A.D.2d 636 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
People v. Ramos
208 A.D.2d 1052 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
People v. Seminara
58 A.D.2d 841 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 A.D.2d 592, 349 N.Y.S.2d 768, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3080, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pendergrass-nyappdiv-1973.