People v. Hodge
| Decision Date | 19 June 1980 |
| Citation | 76 A.D.2d 985,429 N.Y.S.2d 284 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Gabriel C. HODGE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Richard D. Wickerham, Schenectady, for appellant.
John B. Poersch, Schenectady County Dist. Atty., Schenectady, for respondent.
Before MAHONEY, P. J., and GREENBLOTT, SWEENEY, MAIN and MIKOLL, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County, rendered June 5, 1979, upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crime of escape in the first degree, and convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the third degree.
On this appeal, defendant makes four contentions, all of which are lacking in substance. Initially, it is clear that defendant's guilt on the escape charge was proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Not only was defendant unaccountably absent from the schenectady County Jail on February 5, 1979, but a dummy was discovered in his bunk at the jail. Most significantly, defendant himself testified that he left the jail on the morning of February 5, 1979 through a hole made in the bars on a fourth floor window.
Similarly, defendant's conviction need not be reversed because he appeared without counsel on February 14, 1979 in the Town Court of the Town of Princeton at a preliminary hearing whereat it was determined that reasonable grounds existed to hold defendant for Grand Jury action upon a charge of escape in the first degree. The conduct of this hearing did not serve to deprive defendant of his freedom because he was already being held upon the burglary charge to which he ultimately pleaded guilty. Also, it appears that defendant's attorney was advised of the hearing and had ample opportunity to be present, and his absence therefrom is unexplained. Significantly, it is likewise clear that the prosecution obtained no inculpatory statements or other damaging evidence against defendant as a result of the hearing and that defendant was not otherwise prejudiced because of the conduct of the hearing. Under these circumstances, we find that this case is distinguishable on its facts from the situation presented in People v. Samuels, 49 N.Y.2d 218, 424 N.Y.S.2d 892, 400 N.E.2d 1344, wherein a confession was obtained from the defendant in the absence of his counsel after a felony complaint had been filed in court.
The court, likewise, did not err in denying defendant's motion to produce certain...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Hodge
...first degree, each arising from an incident unrelated to the other. On appeal from an Appellate Division order of affirmance, 76 A.D.2d 985, 429 N.Y.S.2d 284, the main issue we confront is whether he is entitled to a reversal of the escape conviction because a preindictment preliminary hear......
-
People v. Thomas
...to any criminal activity, such testimony was clearly not material and the request was properly denied (see, People v. Hodge, 76 A.D.2d 985, 986, 429 N.Y.S.2d 284, mod. on other grounds 53 N.Y.2d 313, 441 N.Y.S.2d 231, 423 N.E.2d We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find ......