O'Neill v. Beisheim
| Decision Date | 17 June 1976 |
| Citation | 39 N.Y.2d 924,386 N.Y.S.2d 576 |
| Parties | , 352 N.E.2d 880 In the Matter of Harold O'NEILL, Appellant, v. George BEISHEIM, Jr., Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York and Carl A. Vergari, District Attorney for the County of Westchester, Respondents. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Judgment affirmed, without costs. Prohibition is not now warranted where the trial sought to be prohibited has been held and where the issues tendered may be raised on the direct appeal following such trial now pending in the Appellate Division.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
6 cases
-
Dale v. Burns
...“prohibit”. Further, petitioner's double jeopardy claims may be heard on his pending direct appeal ( see Matter of O'Neill v. Beisheim, 39 N.Y.2d 924, 925, 386 N.Y.S.2d 576, 352 N.E.2d 880; [959 N.Y.S.2d 783]Matter of Kinnaman v. Doran, 278 A.D.2d 923, 923–924, 718 N.Y.S.2d 540;see generall......
-
People ex rel. Pendleton v. Smith
......Beisheim......
- Barker v. Parnossa, Inc.
-
Seiler v. Crandall
...in issue’ " ( Morgenthau , 59 N.Y.2d at 149-150, 464 N.Y.S.2d 392, 451 N.E.2d 150 ; see generally Matter of O'Neill v. Beisheim , 39 N.Y.2d 924, 925, 386 N.Y.S.2d 576, 352 N.E.2d 880 [1976] ). Because petitioner does not allege that County Court lacks the power to review the issue and, inde......
Request a trial to view additional results