People ex Rel. Cooke v. McNulty

4 Citing cases

  1. People v. Wolcott

    111 A.D.2d 943 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)   Cited 11 times

    Initially, we note that an order fixing bail is nonappealable, and, thus, not reviewable by this court on a direct appeal from the judgment of conviction ( see, People ex rel. Rosenthal v Wolfson, 48 N.Y.2d 230, 232; People ex rel. Klein v. Krueger, 25 N.Y.2d 497, 499). Such an order may properly be reviewed in a habeas corpus proceeding where it appears that either constitutional or statutory standards proscribing excessive bail have been violated (CPLR 7010 [b]; People ex rel. Ryan v Infante, 108 A.D.2d 987; People ex rel. Cooke v. McNulty, 48 A.D.2d 586, 587). Defendant, however, failed to pursue this remedy and may not now be heard to complain.

  2. People ex Rel. Stinson v. Infante

    81 A.D.2d 696 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)

    Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered October 22, 1980 in Albany County, which dismissed a writ of habeas corpus after a hearing. Judgment affirmed, without costs (see People ex rel. Parone v Phimister, 29 N.Y.2d 580, 581; People ex rel. Klein v Krueger, 25 N.Y.2d 497; People ex rel. Cooke v McNulty, 48 A.D.2d 586). Mahoney, P.J., Sweeney, Kane, Yesawich, Jr., and Weiss, JJ., concur.

  3. People ex Rel. Mitchell v. McNulty

    53 A.D.2d 790 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

    Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered June 4, 1976 in Albany County, which sustained a writ of habeas corpus and reduced the amount of petitioner's bail fixed by the County Court from $100,000 to $35,000. On the record of this case, habeas corpus relief was appropriate (People ex rel. Klein v Krueger, 25 N.Y.2d 497; People ex rel. Lobell v McDonnell, 296 N.Y. 109; People ex rel. Zinzow v Harkness, 48 A.D.2d 746). The judgment of Special Term must be affirmed, as there is a constitutionally rational basis for its determination (People ex rel. Cooke v McNulty, 48 A.D.2d 586; People ex rel. Goines v Howard, 41 A.D.2d 683). Judgment affirmed, without costs.

  4. People

    147 Misc. 2d 213 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1990)   Cited 3 times

    The scope of review upon a petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking review of a denial of bail is limited to whether constitutional or statutory standards were violated (People ex rel. Klein v Krueger, 25 N.Y.2d 497). The test which this court must apply is to determine if there is a constitutionally rational basis for County Court's determination (People ex rel. Cooke v McNulty, 48 A.D.2d 586). The only matter of legitimate concern in determining a bail application is whether any bail or the amount fixed is necessary to insure a defendant's future court appearances (CPL 510.30 [a]; Matter of Sardino v State Commn. on Judicial Conduct, 58 N.Y.2d 286, 289). "There must be a sufficient showing on the record to support the decision and the exercise of discretion must be upon a rational basis delineated by the criteria listed under CPL 510.30" (People ex rel. Ryan v Infante, 108 A.D.2d 987, 988).