People ex rel. Reynolds v. Martin
Decision Date | 03 July 1957 |
Parties | , 144 N.E.2d 20 The PEOPLE of the State of New York ex rel. Virgil Earl REYNOLDS, Appellant, v. Walter B. MARTIN, as Warden of Attica Prison, Respondent. |
Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
George J. Skivington, Rochester, for appellant.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. (Frederick T. Devlin and James O. Moore, Jr., Albany, of counsel), for respondent.
This appeal by relator is taken pursuant to permission granted by our court from an order of the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, which unanimously affirmed an order of the Wyoming County Court dismissing his writ of habeas corpus and remanding him to the custody of the respondent, Warden of Attica State Prison.
The facts may be stated briefly as follows. On January 31, 1939 the relator was convicted in the Supreme Court, Niagara County, on his plea of guilty, of the crime of murder in the second degree and, thereafter, was sentenced to be confined in Attica State Prison for a term of not less than 20 years nor more than his natural life. Shortly after relator had commenced to serve his sentence, the State of Pennsylvania applied to the Governor of this State for the release of relator for the purpose of answering a charge of murder in the first degree. An agreement was subsequently entered into between the Governors of the States of New York and Pennsylvania which, in substance, provided that relator was to be surrendered to Pennsylvania for the purpose of standing trial there; that if he were acquitted or if he were convicted and given a lesser sentence than that which he was serving in New York, he was to be returned to New York to finish his sentence here; but, that if he were convicted and sentenced to either life imprisonment or execution, he was to be left in the custody of the State of Pennsylvania.
In accordance with the terms of the agreement, relator was released to the Pennsylvania authorities to be tried for murder in the first degree. He entered a plea of guilty and on April 1, 1939 was sentenced to confinement in a Pennsylvania prison for life. Relator was incarcerated in the Pennsylvania prison until April 15, 1954, on which date the Governor of Pennsylvania commuted his sentence to a minimum term of 15 years, 1 month, expiring on May 1, 1954. The Governor's order also provided that relator was to be returned to New York. In pursuance of that order relator was returned to New York on January 18, 1955, and reincarcerated in Attica State Prison.
The relator's principal contention in this proceeding is that the Governor of this State waived any further jurisdiction by this State over him and commuted his New York sentence by releasing him to the authorities of Pennsylvania under the above-described agreement with the Governor of Pennsylvania.
This court recently had occasion to say that, People ex rel. Rainone v. Murphy, 1 N.Y.2d 367, 371, 153 N.Y.S.2d 21, 25. That being true, it cannot be said that by surrendering the relator to the Pennsylvania authorities to be prosecuted for the crime alleged to have been committed in this State, the Governor effected a waiver of this State's rights thereafter to require the relator to serve the balance of his New York sentence.
As the relator points out, however, the Governor of New York here went further than merely releasing relator to Pennsylvania for the purpose of standing trial there. The Governor of New York also agreed that if relator were convicted and sentenced to either life imprisonment or execution he was to be left in the custody of Pennsylvania. Since relator was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, he was left in the custody of Pennsylvania. Relator insists that the New York Governor's act of surrender under those circumstances amounted to a commutation of his New York sentence to the time served as of the time he was surrendered to Pennsylvania.
Under section 4 of article IV of the New York State Constitution ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fletcher v. Graham, No. 2005-SC-1009-MR.
...York] Constitution and the implementing statutes. There is no showing of formal compliance here." People ex rel. Reynolds v. Martin, 3 N.Y.2d 217, 165 N.Y.S.2d 26, 144 N.E.2d 20, 23 (1957). The following are some examples of why pardons have been declared • Failure to comply with the requir......
-
People ex rel. Henderson v. Casscles
...the Court of Appeals has subsequently held that habeas corpus does not lie under similar circumstances (People ex rel. Reynolds v. Martin, 3 N.Y.2d 217, 165 N.Y.S.2d 26, 144 N.E.2d 20, cert. den. 355 U.S. 885, 78 S.Ct. 154, 2 L.Ed.2d 114). In Reynolds the Court passed upon the merits of the......
-
People ex rel. Kendall v. Follette
...Dutchess County authorities pending disposition of the Dutchess County charges) and under the holding in People ex rel. Reynolds v. Martin, 3 N.Y.2d 217, 165 N.Y.S.2d 26, 144 N.E.2d 20, cert. den. 355 U.S. 885, 78 S.Ct. 154, 2 L.Ed.2d 114 (for the time spent in the Connecticut state prison ......
-
Reginald A. Wilkinson, Director, Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction v. Donald Lee Maurer Et Al., (donald Lee Maurer, Lee Seiber, Rosalie Grant, Elizabeth Green, Saram Bellinger and Willie Jester)
...relied on by appellees applies only to the remission of fines and does not address the issue under consideration in this case. In Martin, the only out-of-state case cited appellees with a constitution similar to Ohio's, the court stated that the governor was required to act in compliance wi......