Marangelo v. Criminal Court of City of New York
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (New York) |
| Writing for the Court | LOUIS J. CAPOZZOLI |
| Citation | 49 Misc.2d 414,267 N.Y.S.2d 791 |
| Parties | Application of Louis MARANGELO, Petitioner, for an Order Pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Laws, and Rules v. The CRIMINAL COURT OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, in the County of New York, the Several Judges of Said Court, and Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney of New York County, and his Representatives, Respondents. Application of Louis COSTELLO, Petitioner, for an Order Pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Laws and Rules v. The CRIMINAL COURT OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, in the County of New York, the Several Judges of Said Court, and Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney of New York County, and his Representatives, Respondents. |
| Decision Date | 18 February 1966 |
Page 791
Pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Laws, and Rules
v.
The CRIMINAL COURT OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, in the County of
New York, the Several Judges of Said Court, and Frank S.
Hogan, District Attorney of New York County, and his
Representatives, Respondents.
Application of Louis COSTELLO, Petitioner, for an Order
Pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Laws and Rules
v.
The CRIMINAL COURT OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, in the County of
New York, the Several Judges of Said Court, and
Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney of New
York County, and his
Representatives, Respondents.
Page 792
[49 Misc.2d 415] Henry B. Rothblatt, New York City, for petitioner; Frank S. Hogan, Dist. Atty., New York County, Gerard T. McGuire, Asst. Dist. Atty., of counsel.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. of New York, for Criminal Court of the City of New York and judges thereof; Charles A. La Torella, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel.
LOUIS J. CAPOZZOLI, Justice.
Application under calendar number 167 of January 21, 1966 is consolidated herein with the application under calendar number 166 of the same date, and both are decided together.
Each of the petitioners in each Article 78 CPLR proceeding invokes the judicial power to prohibit respondents, the Criminal Court of the City of New York and the District Attorney of the County of New York from proceeding with the prosecution of informations charging each of the petitioners with the crime of criminal contempt, in violation of Penal Law, § 600(6).
The strikingly similar background facts of each application are not the subject of controversy. Each petitioner had been summoned and appeared before the Third July 1964 Grand Jury of New York County during that body's investigation to determine whether the crimes of conspiracy to bribe public officers and bribery of public officers have been committed in connection with violations of the gambling laws of the State of New York. Petitioners, former police officers, appeared before the aforesaid Grand Jury on April 6, April 13 and June 29, 1965. Although the Grand Jury granted them complete immunity from prosecution for any crimes disclosed by their testimony, each petitioner, though advised and intelligently aware of the immunity afforded, refused to answer questions propounded to each one before the Grand...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Failla
...disposed of the defendant's double jeopardy claim, citing three cases: Matter of Marangelo v. Criminal Court of City of New York, 49 Misc.2d 414, 267 N.Y.S.2d 791; People v. Costello, 21 N.Y.2d 967, 290 N.Y.S.2d 194, 237 N.E.2d 356; and People ex rel. Maurer v. Jackson, 2 N.Y.2d 259, 264, 1......
-
People v. Colombo
...Gallo that these indictments place them twice in jeopardy for the same acts (Matter of Marangelo v. Criminal Court of City of New York, 49 Misc.2d 414, 267 N.Y.S.2d 791; People v. Costello, 21 N.Y.2d 967, 290 N.Y.S.2d 194, 237 N.E.2d 356; People ex rel. Maurer v. Jackson, [32 A.D.2d 813] 2 ......
-
Laurie v. State, 40135
...received all the notices served, he had assumed that that was a courtesy service upon his and that the office of James G. Blake also had [49 Misc.2d 414] received copies of the notices and, for that reason, he took no step to review these matters with Mr. The Court has very little patience ......
-
People v. Sudore, 2009 NY Slip Op 51333(U) (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 6/23/2009), 0934-2008
...power of the court to punish summarily for an offense against the dignity of the court." Marangelo v. Criminal Court of City of New York, 49 Misc 2d 414 (NY Sup. Ct., Feb. 16, 1966). "The purpose of a criminal contempt proceeding for willful disobedience of its lawful mandate is to vindicat......