People v. Jefferson
| Decision Date | 22 January 1968 |
| Citation | 29 A.D.2d 681,287 N.Y.S.2d 605 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Albert JEFFERSON, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
William Cahn, Dist. Atty., Nassau County, for respondent; Donald Paul DeRiggi, Asst. Dist. Atty., of counsel.
Albert Jefferson, pro se.
Before BELDOCK, P.J., and BRENNAN, RABIN, HOPKINS and BENJAMIN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a proceeding which was treated by the County Court, Nassau County, as in Coram nobis to vacate a judgment of said court rendered March 7, 1958, defendant appeals from an order of said court dated March 30, 1967, which denied the application. Order affirmed.
In March, 1949 defendant was sentenced to a reformatory term upon his plea of guilty to burglary in the third degree. In March, 1958 he was convicted of rape in the first degree and sentenced as a second felony offender. In April, 1964 section 1943 of the Penal Law was amended by in part providing:
In March, 1964 defendant had moved to vacate his 1949 judgment of conviction and to be resentenced as a first felony offender, on the ground that he had not been represented by counsel at the time of his 1949 plea and sentence. After a hearing in September, 1964 his motion was denied on the ground that he had effectively waived his right to counsel. In December, 1966 he moved to be resentenced upon his 1958 conviction on the ground that, at the time he was sentenced in 1958 as a second felony offender, the court did not advise him that he had a right to object that his 1949 conviction had been obtained unconstitutionally. He alleged that his 1949 conviction had been obtained in violation of his right to counsel.
In our opinion, defendant's motion was properly denied. Though the procedural form for retroactive application of section 1943 of the Penal Law, as amended in 1964, is a motion for resentence, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States ex rel. Kenny v. Follette
...the same question, the § 1943 procedure was unavailable to him. To support this contention, he cites People v. Jefferson, 29 A.D.2d 681, 287 N.Y.S.2d 605 (2nd Dept.1968). That case involved a petitioner who was sentenced as a second felony offender in 1958, prior to the enactment of the rel......
-
People v. Graham
...precluded from raising that issue in a subsequent proceeding. (People v. Harley, 37 A.D.2d 742, 743, 323 N.Y.S.2d 256 People v. Jefferson, 29 A.D.2d 681, 287 N.Y.S.2d 605 People v. Cole, 59 Misc.2d 922, 300 N.Y.S.2d 898 cf. United States ex rel. Kenny v. Follette, 410 F.2d 1276, 1279 [2d Ci......
-
People v. Cole
...Section 1943 does not vest a defendant with the endless right to litigate the identical claim previously settled. People v. Jefferson, 29 A.D.2d 681, 287 N.Y.S.2d 605. There comes a time when and a point where juridical cognition must be made of actuality based upon the cumulative deposit o......