People v. Sullivan
Decision Date | 12 May 1971 |
Citation | People v. Sullivan, 322 N.Y.S.2d 730, 28 N.Y.2d 900, 271 N.E.2d 561 (N.Y. 1971) |
Parties | , 271 N.E.2d 561 PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Joseph J. SULLIVAN, Appellant. |
Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, 32 A.D.2d 1042, 303 N.Y.S.2d 1012.
Edward J. Boyle, New York City, for defendant-appellant.
Thomas J. Mackell, Kew Gardens (Cornelius J. O'Brien, Maspeth, of counsel), for respondent.
By a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, Edward Thompson, J., rendered after a jury trial, that defendant was convicted of the crime of manslaughter in the second degree and he appealed.
The Appellate Division affirmed and the defendant appealed pursuant to permission.
Appeal dismissed upon the ground that appellant is not presently available to obey the mandate of the Court in the event of an affirmance.(SeePeople v. Genet, 59 N.Y. 80, andPeople v. Del Rio, 14 N.Y.2d 165, 250 N.Y.S.2d 257, 199 N.E.2d 359).
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Cedeno v. Conway
...Court in the event of an affirmance [.]’ ” Skiff-Murray, 305 A.D.2d at 752, 760 N.Y.S.2d 564 (quoting People v. Sullivan, 28 N.Y.2d 900, 901, 322 N.Y.S.2d 730, 271 N.E.2d 561 (1971); other citations ...
-
Taveras v. Smith
...and the Court of Appeals have dismissed fugitives' appeals' on the basis of their absence." (quoting People v. Sullivan, 28 N.Y.2d 900, 901, 322 N.Y.S.2d 730, 271 N.E.2d 561 (1971) and citing Moreover, New York courts seemingly have full authority to hear the appeal of a fugitive defendant ......
-
Root v. Kapelman
...court in the event of an affirmance. (People v. Parmaklidis, 38 N.Y.2d 1005, 384 N.Y.S.2d 442, 348 N.E.2d 918; People v. Sullivan, 28 N.Y.2d 900, 322 N.Y.S.2d 730, 271 N.E.2d 561; People v. Del Rio, 14 N.Y.2d 165, 250 N.Y.S.2d 257, 199 N.E.2d 359.) In fact, the non-availability of the appel......
-
People v. Ventura
...102 [1996]; Ortega–Rodriguez v. United States, 507 U.S. 234, 242, 113 S.Ct. 1199, 122 L.Ed.2d 581 [1993]; People v. Sullivan, 28 N.Y.2d 900, 322 N.Y.S.2d 730, 271 N.E.2d 561 [1971]; People v. Hernandez, 266 A.D.2d 116, 698 N.Y.S.2d 147 [1st Dept.1999]; People v. Johnson, 191 A.D.2d 279, 595......