People v. Romer

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Romer

292 N.E.2d 789, 31 N.Y.2d 919, 340 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1972 N.Y. LEXIS 887

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 29, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 292 N.E.2d 789 (People v. Romer) 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. Romer, 292 N.E.2d 789, 31 N.Y.2d 919, 340 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1972 N.Y. LEXIS 887 (N.Y. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Entry and acceptance of the defendant’s plea of guilty to count three of the indictment in complete satisfaction thereof, constituted a disposition of the entire indictment. Thus, the County Court Avas without the poAver to entertain a further plea to that indictment absent a reinstatement thereof which could have been accomplished by permitting the defendant to withdraw his original plea of guilty to count three. (See, e.g., Code Crim. Pro., § 337; CPL 220.30, 220.60.)

[921]*921Since the County Court improperly accepted the defendant’s plea of guilty to the first count without allowing him to withdraw his original plea of guilty to the third count, the resentencing proceedings were invalid, and the case must be remanded to the County Court in accordance with the order of the Appellate Division.

Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Entry and acceptance of the defendant’s plea of guilty to count three of the indictment in complete satisfaction thereof, constituted a disposition of the entire indictment. Thus, the County Court Avas without the poAver to entertain a further plea to that indictment absent a reinstatement thereof which could have been accomplished by permitting the defendant to withdraw his original plea of guilty to count three. (See, e.g., Code Crim. Pro., § 337; CPL 220.30, 220.60.)

[921]*921Since the County Court improperly accepted the defendant’s plea of guilty to the first count without allowing him to withdraw his original plea of guilty to the third count, the resentencing proceedings were invalid, and the case must be remanded to the County Court in accordance with the order of the Appellate Division.

Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 N.E.2d 789, 31 N.Y.2d 919, 340 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1972 N.Y. LEXIS 887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-romer-ny-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack