People on Complaint of Forastiere v. Clark

CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division
Writing for the CourtBefore BREITEL; PER CURIAM
Citation3 A.D.2d 700,159 N.Y.S.2d 66
Decision Date11 February 1957
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of New York, on the Complaint of Michael FORASTIERE, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Leathia CLARK, Defendant-Respondent.

Page 66

159 N.Y.S.2d 66
3 A.D.2d 700
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, on the Complaint of
Michael FORASTIERE, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
Leathia CLARK, Defendant-Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
Feb. 11, 1957.

E. Strauss, New York City, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Before BREITEL, J. P., and RABIN, FRANK and VALENTE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Two information were filed against this defendant charging violation of the Unemployment Insurance Law, McKinney's Labor Law, § 632, subd. 1(a), for different periods. The record discloses that with respect to the first information, no trial was ever held and no witness was sworn. The case was twice adjourned and then dismissed for lack of prosecution. Thereafter the second information was dismissed upon the grounds of double jeopardy. In order for the first information to have constituted a bar to the trial for the second, it was essential that the defendant be arraigned, plead to a valid charge, and evidence given, People ex rel. Meyer v. Warden on Nassau County Jail, 269 N.Y. 426, 199 N.E. 647. This court in disposing of the question of double jeopardy with

Page 67

respect to an information held that the test is whether evidence had been taken, People v. Pearl, 272 App.Div. 563, 74 N.Y.S.2d 108. Judgment dismissing Special Sessions information No. 3036, Docket No. 3541, unanimously reversed and the information reinstated. Order filed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • Bland v. Supreme Court, New York County
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • November 29, 1967
    ...v. Jackson, 20 N.Y.2d 440, 231 N.E.2d 722, 285 N.Y.S.2d 8; People ex rel. Meyer v. Warden, 269 N.Y. 426, 199 N.E. 647; People v. Clark, 3 A.D.2d 700, 159 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Ercole, 2 Misc.2d 1015, 154 N.Y.S.2d 128, affd. 4 A.D.2d 881, 167 N.Y.S.2d 548, revd. on other grounds 4 N.Y.2d 61......
  • Fonseca v. Judges of Family Court of Kings County
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • April 11, 1969
    ...non-jury case, the defendant is deemed to have been placed in jeopardy when the trial commences and evidence introduced (People v. Clark, 3 A.D.2d 700, 159 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Pearl, 272 App.Div. 563, 74 N.Y.S.2d 108). The rationale of the rule is that in nonjury cases the taking of evid......
  • People v. Mollica
    • United States
    • New York Court of General Sessions
    • June 16, 1960
    ...and evidence given.' People ex rel. Meyer v. Warden, 269 N.Y. 426, 428, 199 N.E. 647, 648; People on Complaint of Forastiere v. Clark, 3 A.D.2d 700, 159 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Stanton, 84 Misc. 101, 146 N.Y.S. 862. Secondly, defendant herein concedes that, had an order for resubmission been......
  • People v. Dodge
    • United States
    • New York County Court
    • November 20, 1969
    ...440, 285 N.Y.S.2d 8, 231 N.E.2d 722, cert. denied 391 U.S. 928, 88 S.Ct. 1815, 20 L.Ed.2d 668; People on Complaint of Forastiere v. Clark, 3 A.D.2d 700, 159 N.Y.S.2d 66; Bland v. Supreme Court, New York County, 20 N.Y.2d 552, 285 N.Y.S.2d 597, 232 N.E.2d 633. The Court is thus presented wit......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • Bland v. Supreme Court, New York County
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • November 29, 1967
    ...v. Jackson, 20 N.Y.2d 440, 231 N.E.2d 722, 285 N.Y.S.2d 8; People ex rel. Meyer v. Warden, 269 N.Y. 426, 199 N.E. 647; People v. Clark, 3 A.D.2d 700, 159 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Ercole, 2 Misc.2d 1015, 154 N.Y.S.2d 128, affd. 4 A.D.2d 881, 167 N.Y.S.2d 548, revd. on other grounds 4 N.Y.2d 61......
  • Fonseca v. Judges of Family Court of Kings County
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • April 11, 1969
    ...non-jury case, the defendant is deemed to have been placed in jeopardy when the trial commences and evidence introduced (People v. Clark, 3 A.D.2d 700, 159 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Pearl, 272 App.Div. 563, 74 N.Y.S.2d 108). The rationale of the rule is that in nonjury cases the taking of evid......
  • People v. Mollica
    • United States
    • New York Court of General Sessions
    • June 16, 1960
    ...and evidence given.' People ex rel. Meyer v. Warden, 269 N.Y. 426, 428, 199 N.E. 647, 648; People on Complaint of Forastiere v. Clark, 3 A.D.2d 700, 159 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Stanton, 84 Misc. 101, 146 N.Y.S. 862. Secondly, defendant herein concedes that, had an order for resubmission been......
  • People v. Dodge
    • United States
    • New York County Court
    • November 20, 1969
    ...440, 285 N.Y.S.2d 8, 231 N.E.2d 722, cert. denied 391 U.S. 928, 88 S.Ct. 1815, 20 L.Ed.2d 668; People on Complaint of Forastiere v. Clark, 3 A.D.2d 700, 159 N.Y.S.2d 66; Bland v. Supreme Court, New York County, 20 N.Y.2d 552, 285 N.Y.S.2d 597, 232 N.E.2d 633. The Court is thus presented wit......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT