Summary
In People ex rel. Parone v. Phimister, 29 N.Y.2d 580, 324 N.Y.S.2d 311, 272 N.E.2d 894 [1971], the Court of Appeals, in a case in which the defendant was charged with conspiracy and criminal sale and possession of a dangerous drug and faced a maximum sentence of life imprisonment if convicted, the Court held: "There has been a sufficient showing by respondent to support the denial of bail.
Summary of this case from People v. ShaferOpinion
Argued June 8, 1971
Decided July 6, 1971
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, JOHN C. MARBACH, J.
George L. Santangelo for appellant.
Carl A. Vergari, District Attorney ( Janet Cunard of counsel), for respondent.
MEMORANDUM. There has been a sufficient showing by respondent to support the denial of bail. The nature of the offense, probability of conviction, and severity of the sentence which may be imposed, all increasing the risk of flight or unavailability for trial, are relevant criteria under decisional law and the new Criminal Procedure Law to take effect September 1, 1971 (cf. People ex rel. Klein v. Krueger, 25 N.Y.2d 497, 501-502; People ex rel. Gonzalez v. Warden, 21 N.Y.2d 18, 25; People ex rel. Lobell v. McDonnell, 296 N.Y. 109, 111; CPL, § 510.30). Consequently, the denial of bail, supported as it was by the record, was an exercise of discretion resting on a rational basis, and thus beyond correction in habeas corpus ( People ex rel. Klein v. Krueger, supra, at pp. 500-501).
Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON concur.
Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.