Scranton v. Supreme Court of State of New York

Decision Date27 February 1975
Citation325 N.E.2d 876,366 N.Y.S.2d 417,36 N.Y.2d 704
Parties, 325 N.E.2d 876 In the Matter of Agnes SCRANTON, Appellant, v. SUPREME COURT OF the STATE of NEW YORK et al., Respondents. (Two Proceedings.)
CourtNew York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Eleanor Jackson Piel, New York City, for appellant.

Richard H. Kuh, Dist. Atty. (Jonathan Lovett and Lewis R. Friedman, New York City, of counsel), pro se.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. (Samuel A. Hirshowitz and David H. Berman, New York City, of counsel), for Justices of Supreme Court, respondents.

MEMORANDUM.

The judgments of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs. A claim of a denial of a speedy trial is not cognizable in an application pursuant to CPLR article 78 for a judgment prohibiting a District Attorney and the Justices of the Supreme Court from proceeding on an indictment. (Matter of Watts v. Supreme Ct. of State of N.Y., 28 N.Y.2d 714, 320 N.Y.S.2d 755, 269 N.E.2d 412; Matter of Lee v. County Ct. of Erie County, 27 N.Y.2d 432, 437, 318 N.Y.S.2d 705, 267 N.E.2d 452; Matter of Blake v. Hogan, 25 N.Y.2d 747, 303 N.Y.S.2d 505, 250 N.E.2d 568.) While a double jeopardy claim may be raised in a prohibition proceeding (Matter of State of New York v. King, 36 N.Y.2d 59, at p. 64, 364 N.Y.S.2d 879, at p. 883, 324 N.E.2d 351, at p. 354; Matter of Kraemer v. County Ct. of Suffolk County, 6 N.Y.2d 363, 189 N.Y.S.2d 878, 160 N.E.2d 633), this petition should nevertheless be denied. The petitioner was not placed in jeopardy despite the fact that three jurors had been sworn before a mistrial was declared. (CPL 40.30, subd. 1, par. (b).)

BREITEL, C.J., and JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE, JJ., concur in memorandum.

Judgments, 43 A.D.2d 1015, 352 N.Y.S.2d 1008, 44 A.D.2d 774, 355 N.Y.S.2d 314, affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Dondi v. Jones
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • 3 juin 1976
    ...364 N.Y.S.2d 879, 324 N.E.2d 351; Matter of Lopez v. Justices of Supreme Ct., 36 N.Y.2d 949; Matter of Scranton v. Supreme Ct. of State of N.Y., 36 N.Y.2d 704, 306 N.Y.S.2d 417, 325 N.E.2d 876; Matter of Paciona v. Marshall, 35 N.Y.2d 289, 360 N.Y.S.2d 882, 319 N.E.2d 199; Matter of Wroblew......
  • Rafferty v. Owens
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 8 septembre 1981
    ...of N.Y. Supreme Ct. of Bronx County, 37 N.Y.2d 560, 564, 376 N.Y.S.2d 79, 338 N.E.2d 597; Matter of Scranton v. Supreme Ct. of State of N.Y., 36 N.Y.2d 704, 366 N.Y.S.2d 417, 325 N.E.2d 876.) Nevertheless, we reject the petitioner's suggestion that these principles in combination permit a d......
  • Root v. Kapelman
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 3 avril 1979
    ...v. Lane, Supra, 37 N.Y.2d at p. 580, 376 N.Y.S.2d at p. 98, 338 N.E.2d at p. 610; see, e. g., Matter of Scranton v. Supreme Court of State of N.Y., 36 N.Y.2d 704, 366 N.Y.S.2d 417, 325 N.E.2d 876 (Article 78 proceeding inappropriate to review claim of deprivation of speedy trial).) It has b......
  • United States ex rel. Scranton v. State of New York
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 6 novembre 1975
    ... ... Agnes SCRANTON, Petitioner, ... The STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent ... No. 75 Civ. 1138 ... United States District Court, S. D. New York ... November 6, 1975.402 F. Supp. 1011         Eleanor Jackson Piel, New York City, for petitioner ... have been conflicting decisions on whether a person released on bail is "in custody" for the purposes of a habeas petition.7 In 1973, the Supreme Court in the case of Hensley v. Municipal Court, 411 U.S. 345, 93 S.Ct. 1571, 36 L.Ed.2d 294, held that a person released on his own recognizance ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT