People v. Pittenger

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Pittenger

296 N.E.2d 803, 32 N.Y.2d 711, 344 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 1365

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 25, 1973

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 296 N.E.2d 803 (People v. Pittenger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Pittenger, 296 N.E.2d 803, 32 N.Y.2d 711, 344 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 1365 (N.Y. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed in the following memorandum: Failure to warn a defendant that he may be sentenced as a multiple offender if he has a prior conviction, although directed by section 335-b (subsequently 335-c) of the former Code of Criminal Procedure, does not require reversal where no prejudice is shown (People ex rel. Gallagher v. Follette, 22 N Y 2d 239, [712]*712244-245; People ex rel. Purvis v. La Vallee, 18 N Y 2d 753, 755; People v. Porter, 14 N Y 2d 785, 786, cert. den. 390 U. S. 1016). Where defendant concedes that he was not eligible for multiple-offender treatment, the warning would be meaningless in his case and he was not harmed by the failure to warn (see People ex rel. Doud v. Mancusi, 39 A D 2d 837 [4th Dept.]; People v. Stephens, 38 A D ,2d 908 [1st Dept.]; but see People v. Pray, 37 A D 2d 1004 [3d Dept.]; People v. Jordan, 27 A D 2d 584 [3d Dept.]).

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Breitel, Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones and Waohtler.

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

Order affirmed in the following memorandum: Failure to warn a defendant that he may be sentenced as a multiple offender if he has a prior conviction, although directed by section 335-b (subsequently 335-c) of the former Code of Criminal Procedure, does not require reversal where no prejudice is shown (People ex rel. Gallagher v. Follette, 22 N Y 2d 239, [712]*712244-245; People ex rel. Purvis v. La Vallee, 18 N Y 2d 753, 755; People v. Porter, 14 N Y 2d 785, 786, cert. den. 390 U. S. 1016). Where defendant concedes that he was not eligible for multiple-offender treatment, the warning would be meaningless in his case and he was not harmed by the failure to warn (see People ex rel. Doud v. Mancusi, 39 A D 2d 837 [4th Dept.]; People v. Stephens, 38 A D ,2d 908 [1st Dept.]; but see People v. Pray, 37 A D 2d 1004 [3d Dept.]; People v. Jordan, 27 A D 2d 584 [3d Dept.]).

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Breitel, Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones and Waohtler.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

296 N.E.2d 803, 32 N.Y.2d 711, 344 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 1365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pittenger-ny-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack