Janosko v. Kross
Citation | 27 Misc.2d 210,207 N.Y.S.2d 197 |
Parties | Application of James JANOSKO, Petitioner, v. Hon. Anna KROSS, Commissioner of the Department of Correction, City of New York, Respondent, Pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Act. |
Decision Date | 27 October 1960 |
Court | United States State Supreme Court (New York) |
James Janosko, pro se.
Charles H. Tenney, Corp. Counsel, New York City (George H. Parker, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.
This is purportedly an article 78 proceeding to direct respondent Commissioner of Correction to correct records concerning the commitment of petitioner, who is presently an inmate of Auburn State Prison. Petitioner contends that he should have been credited with 588 days of detention in Manhattan City Prison instead of the 437 days actually credited.
On October 29, 1955 petitioner was committed to said Manhattan City Prison on a charge of burglary in the third degree, allegedly committed in New York County. On February 6, 1956 a warrant for petitioner's arrest on a robbery charge in Kings County was filed at the prison. Thereafter, petitioner was indicted in Kings County for attempted robbery in the first degree, convicted of that crime on November 1 1956 and sentenced on January 8, 1957 to a term of 7 1/2 to 10 years thereon. Petitioner did not immediately begin service of this sentence in a state prison, however, because of the burglary charge still pending against him. On May 2, 1957, petitioner was permitted to plead guilty to a lesser charge of conspiracy under the burglary indictment, and on June 7, 1957, he was sentenced to 'time already served' on the conspiracy plea. Petitioner now claims that the full 588 days spent in the city prison, awaiting the disposition of both cases, should be credited to his state prison sentence, and that a warden in the city prison falsely represented to him that such time would be credited. First of all, petitioner's claim of concurrent sentences entitling him to the time served in the city prison between January 8, 1957 and June 7, 1957, is not well taken. A state prison sentence does not begin to run until a prisoner is physically delivered to the warden of the state prison (Correction Law, § 231). Petitioner's detention in the city prison after January 8, 1957, was not as a result of the state prison sentence, but solely because of the undisposed burglary charge on which he had then been neither convicted nor sentenced. Nor were concurrent sentences running before June 7, 1957, and, on that date, since the sentence was for 'time already served', no sentence ran concurrently and nothing more remained to be served that might run consecutively. Petitioner's reliance on section 2190 of the Penal Law is misplaced.
Petitioner does not mention the name of the warden in the city prison who allegedly told him that time served there would...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bergamini v. Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority
... ... MABSTOA, 116 Misc.2d 6, 453 N.Y.S.2d 289). Thus, MABSTOA cannot be estopped by the actions or statements of its employees (Janosko v. Kross, 27 Misc.2d 210, 207 N.Y.S.2d 197) ... The thrust of the petition is that petitioner's constitutional rights were denied ... ...
-
People ex rel. Henderson v. Casscles
...to the retroactively imposed sentence within the meaning of the Penal Law. The issue is not free from doubt (see Janosko v. Kross, 27 Misc.2d 210, 207 N.Y.S.2d 197; cf. People ex rel. Petite v. Follette, 24 N.Y.2d 60, 298 N.Y.S.2d 950, 246 N.E.2d 722; Correction Law § 218). Nonetheless, the......
-
People v. Vitale
...state facilities from local facilities. People ex rel. Jackson v. Weaver (1951), 279 App.Div. 88, 108 N.Y.S.2d 653; Janosko v. Kross (1960), 27 Misc.2d 210, 207 N.Y.S.2d 197. Our statute is devoid of direction with regard to the commencement of terms not to be served in the state system. Cl......
-
Dour v. Village of Port Jefferson
...or representations made by such officers and/or employees regardless of position, Seif v. City of Long Beach, supra; Janosko v. Kross, 27 Misc.2d 210, 207 N.Y.S.2d 197; Schuster v. City of New York, 207 Misc. 1102, 121 N.Y.S.2d 735, aff'd. 286 App.Div. 389, 143 N.Y.S.2d 778, revd. on other ......