People v. Haynes

Decision Date24 June 1968
Citation291 N.Y.S.2d 869,30 A.D.2d 705
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Moses HAYNES, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Aaron E. Koota, Dist. Atty., Kings County, for respondent; William I. Siegel, Asst. Dist. Atty., of counsel.

Anthony F. Marra, New York City, for defendant-appellant; David G. Taylor, New York City, of counsel.

Before BELDOCK, P.J., and CHRIST, BRENNAN, HOPKINS and BENJAMIN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered June 22, 1964, convicting defendant of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict returned on October 18, 1954, and imposing sentence.

Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial ordered. The findings of fact below are affirmed.

On October 18, 1954, about 2 1/2 months after the commission of the crime, the jury found defendant guilty. There was no indication during the trial that defendant, who was represented by assigned counsel, was incapable of understanding the charge, indictment or proceedings or of making his defense.

On October 27, 1954, nine days after the one-day trial, the trial judge directed that defendant be sent to Kings County Hospital for mental examination, pursuant to section 658 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Two psychiatrists, who examined defendant in that hospital on or about November 19, 1954, concluded that he was insane and incapable of understanding the charges against him, the proceedings against him and of making his defense. Thereafter defendant was committed to Matteawan State Hospital where he remained until February 17, 1964, when he was declared sane. When he appeared for sentence, a discussion was held with regard to a hearing as to his mental capacity. The judge before whom the trial had taken place refused to disqualify himself. A hearing was held on June 22, 1964, during which the aforesaid psychiatrists testified that they could not say whether defendant was sane at the time of trial. Defendant's experienced trial counsel had no substantial recollection of the case. The court found that defendant was capable of understanding the nature of the charges and of making his defense and it imposed sentence on defendant.

'Proof that a defendant was insane at a certain time has a bearing on whether he was insane at a prior time, at least if the times are not remote in relation to each other' (People v. Hill, 9 A.D.2d 451, 454, 195 N.Y.S.2d 295, 299 affd. 8 N.Y.2d 935, 204 N.Y.S.2d 172, 168 N.E.2d 841), but there are difficulties in retrospectively determining an issue as to a defendant's sanity as of a substantial period of time prior to the time of such determination (cf. Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402, 80 S.Ct. 788, 4 L.Ed.2d 824). The mere fact that a defendant was committed to a mental institution shortly after he was convicted is some indication that he was legally insane at the time he pleaded guilty or was found guilty (cf. People v. Moore, 21 A.D.2d 860, ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Miller, Application of
    • United States
    • New York County Court
    • December 27, 1972
    ...one, and the hearing proceeded before me without a jury. Parenthetically, it might also be noted that the holdings in People v. Haynes, 30 A.D.2d 705, 291 N.Y.S.2d 869, and Matter of Roberts v. County Court, 39 A.D.2d 246, 333 N.Y.S.2d 882, regarding disqualification, do not seem to apply w......
  • People v. Frampton
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 25, 1968
    ...of the trial ten weeks prior to the commitment (People v. Bangert, 22 N.Y.2d 799, 292 N.Y.S.2d 900, 239 N.E.2d 644; People v. Haynes, 30 A.D.2d 705, 291 N.Y.S.2d 869; People v. Blando, 29 A.D.2d 689, 287 N.Y.S.2d 472; People v. Moore, 21 A.D.2d 860, 250 N.Y.S.2d 1005). The hearing mandated ......
  • People v. Erazo
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • April 2, 1970
    ...time of the trial 10 weeks prior to the commitment (People v. Bangert, 22 N.Y.2d 799, 292 N.Y.S.2d 900, 239 N.E.2d 644; People v. Haynes, 30 A.D.2d 705, 291 N.Y.S.2d 869; People v. Blando, 29 A.D.2d 689, 287 N.Y.S.2d 472; People v. Moore, 21 A.D.2d 860, 250 N.Y.S.2d 1005). The hearing manda......
  • People v. Corrente
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • May 4, 1970
    ...release.' Since he had presided upon the original trial, Judge Gale disqualified himself in the instant proceeding (People v. Haynes, 30 A.D.2d 705, 291 N.Y.S.2d 869) and transferred the same to this Part (Supreme Court, Part VI, Criminal) for hearing and The appointed psychiatrists have du......
  • 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