TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Hyde

The People of the State of New York v. Robert R. Hyde

People v. Hyde, 16 A.D.2d 942 (1962)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
June 11, 1962
Citations
16 A.D.2d 942229 N.Y.S.2d 6581962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9265

Opinion of the Court

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

In a coram nobis proceeding, defendant appeals from an *943 order of the County Court, Kings County, dated October 13,1961, which denied, without a hearing, his application to vacate a judgment of said court, rendered June 25, 1956, after a jury trial, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree, while armed, and assault in the first degree, and imposing sentence. Said judgment of conviction was affirmed by this court (3 A D 2d 854); leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals was denied June 7, 1957; and a petition for certiorari was denied ( 355 U. S. 916 ). Order affirmed. Although defendant’s previously retained attorney was not present at the arraignment when a plea of not guilty to the indictment was entered in defendant’s behalf, the vacatur of the conviction is not warranted; there is no showing that defendant was in any way prejudiced by the absence of counsel (cf. People v. Spinney, 16 A D 2d 669; People v. Dolac, 3 A D 2d 351, affd. 3 N Y 2d 945; Canizio v. New York, 327 U. S. 82 ). The case (Hamilton v. Alabama, 368 U. S. 52 ) on which defendant relies is not applicable. It does not overrule or impair the rule enunciated in Spinney, Dolac and Canizio in view of the marked difference between the laws of Alabama and Hew York; in view of the Supreme Court’s specific allusion (in Hamilton) to those differences when it referred to the Canizio case; and in view of the fact that this is a non-capital case. Nor, under the rule of Mapp v. Ohio ( 367 U. S. 643 ), does coram nobis lie to vacate a conviction obtained by proof which, at the time of the trial, was deemed to be constitutional evidence (People v. Muller, 11 N Y 2d 154; People v. Figueroa, 220 N. Y. S. 2d 131; People v. Angelet, 221 N. Y. S. 2d 834; People v. Oree, 220 N. Y. S. 2d 121). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1963: 21965: 119632026peak 1963 · 2

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 3

DepthCaseCited by
Canizio v. New York, 327 U.S. 82 (1946) 97
Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) 7,228
Hamilton v. Alabama, 368 U.S. 52 (1961) 1,038

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