From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People ex Rel. Lewis v. McMann

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 6, 1971
267 N.E.2d 586 (N.Y. 1971)

Opinion

Argued December 7, 1970

Decided January 6, 1971

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, HAROLD R. SODEN, J.

Robert G. Leyden for appellant.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General ( Frederick R. Walsh and Ruth Kessler Toch of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM. We agree with the courts below that the relator has not been deprived of his constitutional right to a speedy trial since the delay of seven and one-half months between the indictment and trial was largely caused by relator's multiple motions and delaying tactics. The record discloses that between the time of his indictment and trial, he appeared in court no less than 19 times on various motions and applications. Furthermore, trial was delayed by reason of the discharge by the relator of two assigned counsel, as well as counsel retained by his family.

Under the circumstances, the petition for habeas corpus was properly denied since the relator by his own conduct and actions caused the delay of his trial. ( Matter of Blake v. Hogan, 25 N.Y.2d 747.)

Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL and JASEN concur; Judge GIBSON taking no part.

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

People ex Rel. Lewis v. McMann

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 6, 1971
267 N.E.2d 586 (N.Y. 1971)
Case details for

People ex Rel. Lewis v. McMann

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ex rel. ALFRED LEWIS, Appellant, v…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jan 6, 1971

Citations

267 N.E.2d 586 (N.Y. 1971)
267 N.E.2d 586
318 N.Y.S.2d 942

Citing Cases

People v. Rodriguez

And, in the last few months before trial, the defense occasioned at least two extensive postponements of the…

People v. Planthaber

And insofar as reliance is had on CPL 30.30, the record is no more supportive. It indicates that defendant…