From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Lake

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 4, 1964
199 N.E.2d 847 (N.Y. 1964)

Opinion

Argued May 6, 1964

Decided June 4, 1964

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, IRWIN D. DAVIDSON, J.

Matthew Muraskin and Anthony F. Marra for appellant.

Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney ( Eric A. Seiff and H. Richard Uviller of counsel), for respondent.


Order reversed and a hearing directed. The factual allegations of coercion by the Judge and District Attorney leading to a plea of guilty are not traversed by the District Attorney and are sufficient on their face to require a hearing ( People v. Picciotti, 4 N.Y.2d 340; People v. Guariglia, 303 N.Y. 338; People v. Pearson, 12 N.Y.2d 978).

Concur: Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, BURKE and BERGAN. Judges VAN VOORHIS and SCILEPPI dissent and vote to affirm.


Summaries of

People v. Lake

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 4, 1964
199 N.E.2d 847 (N.Y. 1964)
Case details for

People v. Lake

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. THOMAS LAKE, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jun 4, 1964

Citations

199 N.E.2d 847 (N.Y. 1964)
199 N.E.2d 847
250 N.Y.S.2d 816

Citing Cases

People v. Wright

The sole question presented is whether defendant was entitled to a hearing. The People argue in effect that…

People v. Wright

The District Attorney does not deny the defendant's allegations, nor refute them with conclusive documentary…