People v. Jack
| Decision Date | 26 May 1960 |
| Citation | 203 N.Y.S.2d 907,8 N.Y.2d 857 |
| Parties | , 168 N.E.2d 710 PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Hulan E. JACK, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 10 A.D.2d 336, 199 N.Y.S.2d 336.
Defendant was charged by indictment containing four separate counts. The first count charged a conspiracy and the other three counts charged the acceptance of illegal gratuities by defendant as a public official. The conspiracy count charged a conspiracy, months after alleged acceptance of illegal gratuities, to conceal the alleged acceptance of illegal gratuities. The counts were joined in the indictment under Section 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure providing that when there are several charges for two or more acts or transactions connected together constituting parts of a common scheme or plan, the whole may be joined in one indictment or information in separate counts, instead of having several indictments or informations. The defendant contended that there was an improper joinder of the conspiracy count with the other three counts because they were allegedly not connected together and allegedly did not constitute parts of a common scheme or plan.
The Court of General Sessions, New York County, Gerald P. Culkin, J., rendered an order sustaining a demurrer to the indictment, and the People of the State of New York appealed.
The Appellate Division reversed the order, reinstated the indictment, and held that the four counts were properly joined in one indictment, and that counts charging defendant with accepting illegal gratuities as a public official, and alleging that defendant knowingly and intentionally accepted gifts from a person interested in city business, naming him, was sufficient, as against contention that the accounts failed to charge defendant with knowledge that person in question had business dealings with the city.
The defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals.
Order affirmed.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Hannon
... ... Gleason, 285 App.Div. 278, 280, 136 N.Y.S.2d 220, 222). Therefore, the allegations in the indictment clearly support the assertion that the crimes were connected together, within the meaning of Sec. 279 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (People v. Jack, 10 A.D.2d 336, 339--340, 199 N.Y.S.2d 336, 339--340, aff'd, 8 N.Y.2d 857, 203 N.Y.S.2d 907, 168 N.E.2d 710) and, for precisely that reason, the Court is without power to grant the motion for severance. In such case the Legislature has seen fit to withhold any power to sever (People v. Jack, ... ...
-
People v. Hetherington
...v. Bussey, 297 N.Y. 627, 75 N.E.2d 742 (2 murders) ; People v. Jacinto, 289 N.Y. 588, 43 N.E.2d 721 (2 murders); People v. Jack, 8 N.Y.2d 857, 203 N.Y.S.2d 907, 168 N.E.2d 710 (3 briberies); People v. Colligan, 9 N.Y.2d 900, 216 N.Y.S.2d 708, 175 N.E.2d 835 (murder--committed in the course ......
-
People v. McKensley
...only where the charges involve two or more acts or transactions. (People v. Jack, 10 A.D.2d 336, 340, 199 N.Y.S.2d 336, 340, aff'd 8 N.Y.2d 857, 203 N .Y.S.2d 907, 167 N.E.2d 710. See, also, People v. Ackley, 270 App.Div. 958, 62 N.Y.S.2d 771, aff'd 296 N.Y. 731, 70 N.E.2d 544, same case 33......
-
People v. Yuk Bui Yee
... ... 3; see, Denzer, Practice Commentary to Section 200.20; see also, Code of Criminal Procedure, § 279 (repealed); People v. Luciano, 277 N.Y. 348, at 362, 14 N.E.2d 433 at 436, rearg. den., 278 N.Y. 624, 16 N.E.2d 129, cert. den., 305 U.S. 620, 59 S.Ct. 81, 83 L.Ed. 396 (1938); People v. Jack, 10 A.D.2d 336, at 340, 199 N.Y.S.2d 336, at 340 (First Dept.), affd. no opin., 8 N.Y.2d 857, 203 N.Y.S.2d 907, 168 N.E.2d 710 (1960)) ... The Criminal Procedure Law provides, in section 200.20, for the joinder of offenses in three different situations: Subdivision 2(a) where a ... ...