People v. Romano
| Decision Date | 18 February 1957 |
| Citation | 165 N.Y.S.2d 917,5 Misc.2d 171 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. Christopher ROMANO. |
| Court | New York County Court |
Daniel V. Sullivan, Dist. Atty., Bronx County, New York City, by Milton Altschuler, New York City, for the People.
Christopher Romano, pro se.
The defendant was convicted by jury verdict of rape, first degree and on September 22, 1953, was sentenced by this court, as a second offender, to State Prison for a term of 10 to 20 years. This judgment of conviction was unanimously affirmed on appeal (284 App.Div. 878, 135 N.Y.S.2d 780). Several applications, in the nature of coram nobis, were thereafter made by the defendant attacking the legality of the said judgment of conviction on various grounds, each of which were denied. In his latest petition the defendant urges his recall for resentence on the ground that Section 480, Code of Criminal Procedure, was not complied with, i. e., he was not asked whether he had any legal cause why judgment should not be pronounced against him. He further seeks to receive three days' credit, as jail time, under Section 2193, Penal Law, for his confinement in a Michigan county jail, pending his delivery to the New York authorities, and time spent in his transportation to New York and his confinement in the Bronx City Prison. As to the merits of these claims, the available sentencing minutes establish compliance with the requirements of Section 480, C.C.P. The one week stay of execution of the judgment imposed by this court has no relevancy to the challenged legality of such proceeding. The cited case of People ex rel. Miller v. Martin, 1 N.Y.2d 406, 153 N.Y.S.2d 202, is without applicability to the facts of the instant case. On the jail time credit sought, it appears that the defendant's commitment papers have endorsed thereon as jail time the actual period spent by him in the Bronx City Prison prior to his sentence. Any grievance with respect to the time allotted may be tested by the defendant, at the proper time, under habeas corpus. This motion is in all respects denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People ex rel. Henderson v. Casscles
...(habeas corpus does not lie); People ex rel. Manekos v. Noble, 26 Misc.2d 460, 207 N.Y.S.2d 501 (writ not questioned); People v. Romano, 5 Misc.2d 171, 165 N.Y.S.2d 917, app. dism. 284 App.Div. 878, 135 N.Y.S.2d 780 (habeas corpus proper)), the Court of Appeals has subsequently held that ha......
-
Browne v. State Bd. of Parole
...73; People ex rel. Devoe v. Kelly, 97 N.Y. 212; People ex rel. Fishweicher v. Snyder, 183 Misc. 549, 53 N.Y.S.2d 850; People v. Romano, 5 Misc.2d 171, 165 N.Y.S.2d 917. Thus, if it were held in such a proceeding that the sentences really ran concurrently and not consecutively, the petitione......
-
People v. Burke
...to be the proper recourse for jail-time credit or illegal detention. Donohue v. Brown, 3 Misc.2d 969, 153 N.Y.S.2d 336; People v. Romano, 5 Misc.2d 171, 165 N.Y.S.2d 917; People v. Tyson, 6 Misc.2d 722, 164 N.Y.S.2d The invariable answer to defendant's request for intervention in this forum......
-
People ex rel. Coates v. O'Hara
...People ex rel. Devoe v. Kelly, 97 N.Y. 212; People ex rel. Fishweicher v. Snyder, 183 Misc. 549, 53 N.Y.S.2d 850; cf. People v. Romano, 5 Misc.2d 171, 165 N.Y.S.2d 917. The writ is dismissed and petitioner ...