People v. Bangert
| Decision Date | 14 June 1968 |
| Citation | 22 N.Y.2d 799,239 N.E.2d 644,292 N.Y.S.2d 900 |
| Parties | , 239 N.E.2d 644 PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Edward BANGERT, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, 29 A.D.2d 649, 287 N.Y.S.2d 865.
George J. Aspland, Riverhead (John Copertino, St. James, of counsel), for respondent.
Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of unlawful entry.
The County Court, Suffolk County, George F. X. McInerney, J., rendered a judgment, and defendant was given a sentence of one year.
The Appellate Division entered a judgment January 3, 1968 affirming the judgment. Christ, J., dissented and voted to reverse the judgment and remit the case to the County Court for further proceedings, on ground that pre-sentence report which was before the sentencing court was shot through with evidence that defendant may have been insane at the time he pleaded guilty in the case and may not be competent at the present time, and that the crime of which he stood convicted was a senseless thing.
The defendant appealed by permission of a Justice of the Appellate Division.
Judgment reversed and matter remitted to the County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: The judgment should be reversed and the case remitted to the County Court for a hearing to determine whether the defendant was competent at the time of sentencing (Code Crim.Proc. § 658 et seq.). Defendant's history of mental illness, as indicated by the presentence report, was such that the sentencing court was bound to make some inquiry into defendant's mental condition at the time of sentencing, whether or not counsel raised the issue. (People v. Boundy, 10 N.Y.2d 518, 225 N.Y.S.2d 207, 180 N.E.2d 565; People v. Sprague, 11 N..Y.2d 951, 228 N.Y.S.2d 832, 183 N.E.2d 232).
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Gensler
...upon by the dissent do not support a result different from the one we reach on this record. For example, in People v. Bangert, 22 N.Y.2d 799, 292 N.Y.S.2d 900, 239 N.E.2d 644, the trial court failed to seek the advice of psychiatric experts or otherwise make any inquiry into defendant's com......
-
People v. Harris
...defendant to be examined" (People v. Armlin, 37 N.Y.2d 167, 172, 371 N.Y.S.2d 691, 332 N.E.2d 870; see also, People v. Bangert, 22 N.Y.2d 799, 292 N.Y.S.2d 900, 239 N.E.2d 644). Fleshing out this nonwaiver principle, sundry Federal decisions have held that collateral attack of a judgment on......
-
Silverstein v. Henderson
...the first time on appeal. People v. Armlin, supra, 37 N.Y.2d at 170-72, 371 N.Y.S.2d 691, 332 N.E.2d 870; People v. Bangert, 22 N.Y.2d 799, 800, 292 N.Y.S.2d 900, 239 N.E.2d 644 (1968). Thus, if the trial court has been alerted to the defendant's mental problems and fails to order a hearing......
-
People v. Thomas
...right to invoke CPL article 730 when questions arose as to defendant's mental state following trial (see People v. Bangert, 22 N.Y.2d 799, 800, 292 N.Y.S.2d 900, 239 N.E.2d 644 [1968] ), it did not abuse its discretion in declining to, upon its own initiative, retroactively investigate whet......