People v. Rodriquez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rodriquez

23 A.D.2d 683, 257 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4662

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 15, 1965·Published

Opinion

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendants appeal from an order of the ‘Supreme Court, Kings County, entered March 27, 1963, which denied without a hearing their application to vacate as to each of them a judgment of the former County Court, Kings County, rendered June 24,1958 after a jury trial, convicting them of attempted robbery in the first degree, and imposing sentence. The judgment of conviction was previously affirmed 'by this court (7 A D 2d 1017). Order reversed on the law and the facts, and application remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for a hearing of the issues and for a determination based upon the proof adduced at such hearing. In our opinion, the defendants’ present papers: (a) raise issues which were never determined at 'the bearing conducted upon the defendants’ previous coram nobis application (see 14 A D 2d 917); and (lb) reveal the existence of evidence which is of sufficient substance to warrant a he’aring upon such issues. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Babin, JJ., concur,

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

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendants appeal from an order of the ‘Supreme Court, Kings County, entered March 27, 1963, which denied without a hearing their application to vacate as to each of them a judgment of the former County Court, Kings County, rendered June 24,1958 after a jury trial, convicting them of attempted robbery in the first degree, and imposing sentence. The judgment of conviction was previously affirmed 'by this court (7 A D 2d 1017). Order reversed on the law and the facts, and application remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for a hearing of the issues and for a determination based upon the proof adduced at such hearing. In our opinion, the defendants’ present papers: (a) raise issues which were never determined at 'the bearing conducted upon the defendants’ previous coram nobis application (see 14 A D 2d 917); and (lb) reveal the existence of evidence which is of sufficient substance to warrant a he’aring upon such issues. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Babin, JJ., concur,

People v. Rodriquez, 23 A.D.2d 683, 257 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4662 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

23 A.D.2d 683 (People v. Rodriquez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.