People v. Sydnor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sydnor

18 A.D.2d 1057, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4046

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

DecidedApril 2, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.2d 1057 (People v. Sydnor) 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. Sydnor, 18 A.D.2d 1057, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4046 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered on November 13, 1962, denying without a hearing petitioner’s motion for a writ of error coram nobis, unanimously affirmed. In People v. Sydnor (11 N Y 2d 846) there was a disavowal of the attorney who appeared at the time of sentence. Here, the petitioner acknowledges representation at the time of sentence. The representation was meaningful. (Canizio v. New York, 327 U. S. 82.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, Valente, McNally and Stevens, JJ.

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

Order, entered on November 13, 1962, denying without a hearing petitioner’s motion for a writ of error coram nobis, unanimously affirmed. In People v. Sydnor (11 N Y 2d 846) there was a disavowal of the attorney who appeared at the time of sentence. Here, the petitioner acknowledges representation at the time of sentence. The representation was meaningful. (Canizio v. New York, 327 U. S. 82.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, Valente, McNally and Stevens, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.2d 1057, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4046, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sydnor-nyappdiv-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack