TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People ex rel. Stephani v. North

People ex rel. Alphonse J. Stephani, Relator v. Charles H. North, Medical Superintendent of Dannemora State Hospital

People ex rel. Stephani v. North, 91 Misc. 616 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1915)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Supreme Court · State Trial Courts
Decided
February 15, 1915
Judges
Kellogg
Citations
91 Misc. 616155 N.Y.S. 595
Headnotes
Habeas corpus—'When writ dismissed. Where a petition for a writ of habeas corpus shows that relator was duly convicted of murder in the second degree' and ' duly sentenced to life imprisonment in a state prison from which he was transferred to a state hospital as an insane person, the writ must be dismissed on the ground that on the face of the petition it appeared that relator was detained by virtue of a final judgment of a competent tribunal of criminal jurisdiction.
Summary
Application for a writ of habeas corpus.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Kellogg

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Kellogg, J.

A convict under sentence, since the year 1891, for the crime of murder in the second degree, seeks discharge under a writ of habeas corpus from Dannemora State Hospital, where since the year 1903 he has been confined on a transfer from Sing Siug prison.

Whenever a male prisoner is certified by a physician of a state prison to be insane, he is transferred to the Dannemora State Hospital. Insanity Law, § 158. The original certificate of conviction is forwarded to the medical superintendent of the hospital. § 158. The convict remains in the hospital for a term no *617 greater than the term of his sentence. § 159. If de- . tained longer it can only be under an order of court committing him as an insane person. § 159. If he becomes sane before his term expires, and the superintendent so certifies, he must be returned to the prison whence he came. § 161.

It is thus clear that two classes of persons are confined in Dannemora State Hospital. First. A class of convicts detained solely as prisoners, the only warrant for whose detention is the original certificate of conviction; and, second, a class of ex-convicts, detained as insane persons, solely under an order of commitment as such, granted by a court or judge at the conclusion of proceedings in lunacy.

In the case under consideration, the convict belongs to the former class. His sentence was life imprisonment. Within the term of that sentence he is confined in one of several of the state institutions devoted to the purpose. His punishment is imprisonment. In the place of his imprisonment he has no choice or say. The state names the place, and it may name for him, when pronounced insane, an insane hospital as well as it may name for another, when pronounced tubercular, a hospital for tubercular convicts. No court may intervene, and by pronouncing a convict sane or well, against the judgment of the prison management, transfer him to another prison. The placing of a convict according as he may be classified as sick or well, dangerous or peaceful, sane or insane, is a detail of prison management with which no court can interfere.

Furthermore it may be said that this is a case in which no writ should in the first instance have issued.

A writ must issue unless it appears from the petition itself that the petitioner is prohibited by law from prosecuting the writ. Code, § 2020. In this instance the petition shows that the relator was duly convicted *618 of the crime of murder in the second degree, and duly sentenced to Sing Sing prison for the term of life, from which prison he was transferred, to Dannemora State Hospital as an insane person. It, therefore, appeared on the face of the petition that he was detained by virtue of a final judgment of a competent tribunal of criminal jurisdiction, in which case ho writ should issue. Code, Code, § 2016. The writ is, therefore, dismissed.

Writ dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1937: 11938: 11941: 11945: 11947: 11949: 119372026peak 1937 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re the Probate of the Last Will & Testament of Stephani250 A.D. 253 (1937)
  2. In re Soborsky199 A. 757 (Vt. 1938)
  3. Dunn v. Jones35 N.W.2d 673 (Neb. 1949)
  4. People ex rel. Sullinger v. Shaw269 A.D. 918 (1945)
  5. Troutman v. State190 Misc. 449 (1947)
  6. People ex el. Greenwell v. McNeill262 A.D. 912 (1941)

Most recent

  1. Dunn v. Jones35 N.W.2d 673 (Neb. 1949)
  2. Troutman v. State190 Misc. 449 (1947)
  3. People ex rel. Sullinger v. Shaw269 A.D. 918 (1945)
  4. People ex el. Greenwell v. McNeill262 A.D. 912 (1941)
  5. In re Soborsky199 A. 757 (Vt. 1938)
  6. In re the Probate of the Last Will & Testament of Stephani250 A.D. 253 (1937)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list