People v. Upson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Upson

20 A.D.2d 572, 245 N.Y.S.2d 798, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2641

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

DecidedDecember 23, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 20 A.D.2d 572 (People v. Upson) 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. Upson, 20 A.D.2d 572, 245 N.Y.S.2d 798, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2641 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the 'Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 13, 1963, which denied without a hearing his application to vacate a judgment of said court, rendered November 16, 1962 on his plea of guilty, convicting him of robbery in the third degree, and imposing sentence. Order affirmed. The application is predicated upon the claim that illegally seized evidence was presented to the Grand Jury which returned the indictment. Defendant, prior to the judgment of conviction, did not move to suppress the illegal evidence, but instead pleaded guilty to the indictment. Nor did defendant appeal from the judgment of conviction. Under the circumstances, on this application he may not raise the question of the admissibility of the evidence (People v. Caminito, 3 N Y 2d 596, 601; People v. Zito, 18 A D 2d 668; People v. Anderson, 8 A D 2d 731). Moreover, the remedy of coram nobis is not available as a substitute for an appeal (People V. Zito, supra; People v. De Groat, 13 A D 2d 557; People v. Morrison, 14 A D 2d 887). Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals from an order of the 'Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 13, 1963, which denied without a hearing his application to vacate a judgment of said court, rendered November 16, 1962 on his plea of guilty, convicting him of robbery in the third degree, and imposing sentence. Order affirmed. The application is predicated upon the claim that illegally seized evidence was presented to the Grand Jury which returned the indictment. Defendant, prior to the judgment of conviction, did not move to suppress the illegal evidence, but instead pleaded guilty to the indictment. Nor did defendant appeal from the judgment of conviction. Under the circumstances, on this application he may not raise the question of the admissibility of the evidence (People v. Caminito, 3 N Y 2d 596, 601; People v. Zito, 18 A D 2d 668; People v. Anderson, 8 A D 2d 731). Moreover, the remedy of coram nobis is not available as a substitute for an appeal (People V. Zito, supra; People v. De Groat, 13 A D 2d 557; People v. Morrison, 14 A D 2d 887). Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 572, 245 N.Y.S.2d 798, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2641, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-upson-nyappdiv-1963.