People v. Woodruff
| Decision Date | 22 February 1968 |
| Citation | 288 N.Y.S.2d 1004,21 N.Y.2d 848 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | , 236 N.E.2d 159 The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Rosemary WOODRUFF, Appellant. |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, 26 A.D.2d 236, 272 N.Y.S.2d 786.
John R. Heilman, Jr., Poughkeepsie (Albert M. Rosenblatt, Poughkeepsie, of counsel), for respondent.
The contemner was subpoenaed before the Grand Jury of Dutchess County on May 3, 1966 as a witness in an inquiry by the Grand Jury into the alleged criminal activities of violating the drug and nuisance sections of the Penal Law, allegedly committed by Dr. Timothy Leary and others at the Castalia Foundation in Millbrook, Dutchess County. Immunity was conferred on the contemner pursuant to Section 2447 of the Penal Law, Consol.Laws, c. 40, in the Grand Jury proceeding. The contemner was asked questions relating to the possession and the use of drugs by certain individuals, but she refused to answer the questions, on ground that her right to religious freedom was being invaded. She testified that her beliefs and practices were closely allied to Hindu beliefs. She grounded her refusal to answer on the sacredness of her relationships between herself and her teachers, who had been arrested, and the privacy of her spiritual beliefs.
The contemner was then brought before the Dutchess County Court, Raymond C. Baratta, J., and was adjudged to be guilty of criminal contempt and was ordered committed to the Dutchess County jail for thirty days and to pay a fine of $250.
A certificate of reasonable doubt was denied by the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, Clare J. Hoyt, J., 50 Misc.2d 430, 270 N.Y.S.2d 838.
The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, 26 A.D.2d 236, 272 N.Y.S.2d 786, Hopkins, J., on July 7, 1966 entered an order affirming the order of the Dutchess County Court adjudging the contemner guilty of contempt of court.
The contemner appealed to the Court of Appeals by permission of the Court of Appeals.
Order affirmed, without costs.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Holy Spirit Ass'n for Unification of World Christianity v. Rosenfeld
...10 N.Y.2d 531, 536, 225 N.Y.S.2d 497, 180 N.E.2d 791; People v. Woodruff, 26 A.D.2d 236, 238, 272 N.Y.S.2d 786, affd. 21 N.Y.2d 848, 288 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 236 N.E.2d 159). The law is well-settled that religious practices are subject to regulation for the protection of society (see La Rocca v. ......
-
People v. Price
...freedom of religion ( People v. Woodruff, 26 A.D.2d 236, 237-239, 272 N.Y.S.2d 786, 787-788 (2d Dept. 1966), Aff'd, 21 N.Y.2d 848, 288 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 236 N.E.2d 159 (1968): compulsion of testimony concerning the organization of religious group), both created by the Constitution. Similarly, ......
-
Grand Jury Subpoena of Stewart, Matter of
...19, 427 N.Y.S.2d 950, 405 N.E.2d 194 (1980); People v. Woodruff, 26 A.D.2d 236, 238, 272 N.Y.S.2d 786 (1966), affd., 21 N.Y.2d 848, 288 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 236 N.E.2d 159 (1968). The Grand Jury's authority to subpoena witnesses is not only historic but essential to its task. Branzburg v. Hayes, ......
-
La Rocca v. Lane
...compelling the individual's testimony before the grand jury (People v. Woodruff, 26 A.D.2d 236, 272 N.Y.S.2d 786, affd. 21 N.Y.2d 848, 288 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 236 N.E.2d 159). The State Constitution, indeed, states that 'the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to * ......
-
A Practice Commentary To Judiciary Law Article 19
...799, 803 (1975); People v. D'Amato, 211 N.Y.S.2d 877, 880-81 (1st Dep't 1961). [50] See People v. Woodruff, 272 N.Y.S.2d 786, affd 288 N.Y.S.2d 1004 (1966). See also In re Furhre, 419 N.Y.S.2d 426, affd on opinion below, All N.Y.S.2d 906 (2d Dep't [51] See United States v. Remini, 967 F.2d ......