Simonson v. Cahn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Simonson v. Cahn

33 A.D.2d 790, 307 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2508

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

DecidedDecember 22, 1969

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 33 A.D.2d 790 (Simonson v. Cahn) 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

Simonson v. Cahn, 33 A.D.2d 790, 307 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2508 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the 'CPLR to prohibit the respondent District Attorney from prosecuting, and the respondent Judges from entertaining or otherwise assuming jurisdiction of, a criminal action against one Clarence Smith for violation of sections 220.05 and 265.05 of the Penal Law until a Grand Jury of Nassau County returns an indictment in the matter. Application granted, without costs; the respondent District Attorney is hereby restrained from prosecuting, and the respondent Judges of the County Court, Nassau County, are hereby restrained from entertaining or assuming jurisdiction of, the criminal action against Clarence Smith upon the charges in question until a Grand Jury of Nassau County returns an indictment against him upon said charges. It is the law of this State that a defendant may not be prosecuted for a felony unless he has been indicted by a Grand .Jury. Until the Grand Jury has acted, no court can acquire jurisdiction to try the charge. A defendant’s waiver of this constitutional right and his consent to be prosecuted upon an information cannot confer jurisdiction to proceed and any conviction thereafter obtained would be a nullity (People ex rel. Battista v. Christian, 249 N. Y. 314, 319—321; see People ex rel. Wachowicz v. Martin, 293 N. Y. 361, 365). 'Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the 'CPLR to prohibit the respondent District Attorney from prosecuting, and the respondent Judges from entertaining or otherwise assuming jurisdiction of, a criminal action against one Clarence Smith for violation of sections 220.05 and 265.05 of the Penal Law until a Grand Jury of Nassau County returns an indictment in the matter. Application granted, without costs; the respondent District Attorney is hereby restrained from prosecuting, and the respondent Judges of the County Court, Nassau County, are hereby restrained from entertaining or assuming jurisdiction of, the criminal action against Clarence Smith upon the charges in question until a Grand Jury of Nassau County returns an indictment against him upon said charges. It is the law of this State that a defendant may not be prosecuted for a felony unless he has been indicted by a Grand .Jury. Until the Grand Jury has acted, no court can acquire jurisdiction to try the charge. A defendant’s waiver of this constitutional right and his consent to be prosecuted upon an information cannot confer jurisdiction to proceed and any conviction thereafter obtained would be a nullity (People ex rel. Battista v. Christian, 249 N. Y. 314, 319—321; see People ex rel. Wachowicz v. Martin, 293 N. Y. 361, 365). 'Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 790, 307 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simonson-v-cahn-nyappdiv-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack