People v. Powenski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Powenski

29 A.D.2d 629, 285 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2845

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

DecidedDecember 7, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 629 (People v. Powenski) 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. Powenski, 29 A.D.2d 629, 285 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2845 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Order revoking probation and directing execution of the sentence unanimously reversed and matter remitted to Erie County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: On June 6,1967 defendant was arraigned on an information charging violation of probation. At that time the court said: “You are entitled to plead not guilty and to have an adjournment to secure the aid of an attorney, or if you wish, you may plead guilty. How do you plead? ” Defendant immediately replied: “ I plead guilty ”. The admonition given was insufficient; upon remand the court should fully and completely advise defendant of his right to assigned counsel if unable to afford an attorney of his own choice. (Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U. S. 128). Furthermore, the defendant indicated he had a defense to the charge against him, and a hearing should have been had. (Appeal from order of Erie County Court, convicting [630]*630defendant of violation of probation.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Del Vecehio, JJ.

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

Order revoking probation and directing execution of the sentence unanimously reversed and matter remitted to Erie County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: On June 6,1967 defendant was arraigned on an information charging violation of probation. At that time the court said: “You are entitled to plead not guilty and to have an adjournment to secure the aid of an attorney, or if you wish, you may plead guilty. How do you plead? ” Defendant immediately replied: “ I plead guilty ”. The admonition given was insufficient; upon remand the court should fully and completely advise defendant of his right to assigned counsel if unable to afford an attorney of his own choice. (Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U. S. 128). Furthermore, the defendant indicated he had a defense to the charge against him, and a hearing should have been had. (Appeal from order of Erie County Court, convicting [630]*630defendant of violation of probation.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Henry and Del Vecehio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 629, 285 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2845, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-powenski-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack