Lockett v. Juviler
| Decision Date | 18 June 1984 |
| Citation | 477 N.Y.S.2d 37,102 A.D.2d 869 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Samuel LOCKETT, Petitioner, v. Michael R. JUVILER, etc., et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Louis Clayton Jones, P.C., Brooklyn (Michael W. Warren of counsel), for petitioner.
Elizabeth Holtzman, Dist. Atty., Brooklyn (Barbara D. Underwood, Peter A. Weinstein and Hazel Sandomire Mushynsky, Brooklyn, of counsel), respondent pro se.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and GIBBONS, BRACKEN and NIEHOFF, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to prohibit the respondent District Attorney from further prosecuting petitioner under indictments nos. 46/81 and 270/81, and to require respondent Justice JUVILER to reinstate petitioner's pleas which were vacated on September 13, 1983.
Petition granted, without costs or disbursements, the respondents other than respondent Prevost are prohibited from prosecuting or entertaining the prosecution of the petitioner under indictments nos. 46/81 and 270/81, and Justice JUVILER is directed to reinstate petitioner's pleas, to commit him to a secure facility pursuant to subdivision 3 of CPL 330.20, and to conduct further proceedings as prescribed in CPL 330.20.
Petitioner, who served in the United States Air Force, was the subject of two indictments accusing him of several counts of robbery. On April 13, 1983 with the consent of the People, the Supreme Court, Kings County (JUVILER, J.), accepted petitioner's pleas of not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect pursuant to CPL 220.15. Petitioner had contended that he was not criminally responsible due to his inability to appreciate the wrongfulness of his acts because of a posttraumatic stress disorder resulting from his experiences in Vietnam as a member of the United States Air Force. Based on extensive psychiatric reports which showed that petitioner was in fact suffering from a posttraumatic stress disorder due to his service in Vietnam (at least six different psychiatrists examined petitioner), the People conceded that the defense of lack of criminal responsibility could not be disproved beyond a reasonable doubt. The People's concession was made without benefit of petitioner's military records (one attempt to obtain the records was unsuccessful). The pleas were entered and an examination order pursuant to subdivisions 2 and 3 of CPL 330.20 was issued. However, the mandated hearing never took place.
Subsequent to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Carter
...488 N.E.2d 1231). Thus, for example, in Matter of Lockett v. Juviler, 65 N.Y.2d 182, 490 N.Y.S.2d 764, 480 N.E.2d 378, rev'g 102 A.D.2d 869, 477 N.Y.S.2d 37, a trial judge vacated a special plea of "not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect" (CPL 220.15) where the plea had been ......
-
People v. Saez
...all of these considerations presupposes fairness in securing agreement between an accused and prosecutor." However, in Matter of Lockett, App.Div., 477 N.Y.S.2d 37, the Appellate Division, Second Department, invalidated the vacatur of a "not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect......
-
Warren v. Montemango
...People v. Lockett, 121 Misc.2d 549, 468 N.Y.S.2d 802 (Sup.Ct. Kings Co.1983), reversed, sub. nom., In the Matter of Lockett v. Juviler, 102 A.D.2d 869, 477 N.Y.S.2d 37 (2d Dept.1984), reversed, Lockett v. Juviler, 65 N.Y.2d 182, 490 N.Y.S.2d 764, 480 N.E.2d 378 In upholding the vacatur of t......
-
Lockett v. Juviler
...Thus the vacatur was improper and invalid (cf. Matter of Campbell v Pesce, 60 NY2d 165 [468 N.Y.S.2d 865, 456 N.E.2d 806] )." (102 A.D.2d 869, 477 N.Y.S.2d 37.) CPL 220.60(3) expressly permits a court to vacate a plea of not responsible by reason of mental disease or defect on application o......