People v. Reddick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Reddick

37 A.D.2d 524, 322 N.Y.S.2d 974, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3892

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

DecidedJune 8, 1971

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 37 A.D.2d 524 (People v. Reddick) 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. Reddick, 37 A.D.2d 524, 322 N.Y.S.2d 974, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of conviction, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered December 2, 1969, sentencing defendant-appellant to the New York City Reformatory, unanimously reversed, on the law, the sentence vacated, and the ease remanded to the sentencing Justice to hold a hearing on defendant-appellant’s application for leave to withdraw his plea of guilty. At the time of sentence, when ailocuted, defendant replied that he was not guilty. This claim was repeated by his counsel. The court did not go further into the básis for defendant’s claim, and denied the application. Further inquiry should have been made, and remand is required for that purpose. (See People v. McKennion, 27 N Y 2d 671.) Concur — McGivern, J. P., Markewieh, Murphy, McNally and Tilzer, JJ.

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

Judgment of conviction, Supreme Court, New York County, rendered December 2, 1969, sentencing defendant-appellant to the New York City Reformatory, unanimously reversed, on the law, the sentence vacated, and the ease remanded to the sentencing Justice to hold a hearing on defendant-appellant’s application for leave to withdraw his plea of guilty. At the time of sentence, when ailocuted, defendant replied that he was not guilty. This claim was repeated by his counsel. The court did not go further into the básis for defendant’s claim, and denied the application. Further inquiry should have been made, and remand is required for that purpose. (See People v. McKennion, 27 N Y 2d 671.) Concur — McGivern, J. P., Markewieh, Murphy, McNally and Tilzer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.2d 524, 322 N.Y.S.2d 974, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-reddick-nyappdiv-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack