From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People ex Rel. Litman v. Warden of the Man

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 17, 2005
23 A.D.3d 258 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

7112.

November 17, 2005.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael R. Ambrecht, J.), entered on or about July 13, 2005, denying the writ of habeas corpus and dismissing the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Litman, Asche Gioiella, New York (Jack T. Litman of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Morrie I. Kleinbart of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Williams, Gonzalez and McGuire, JJ., concur.


The habeas court properly determined that the bail court (Gregory Carro, J.), did not abuse its discretion in denying bail ( see People ex rel. Lazer v. Warden, N.Y. County Men's House of Detention, 79 NY2d 839). The record supports the bail court's determination, based upon the factors enumerated in CPL 510.30 (2) (a), that petitioner is a flight risk, given the severity of the crime charged (murder), the likelihood of a conviction and lengthy sentence, and the financial resources petitioner could use to facilitate flight, including property outside the jurisdiction. This is not an appropriate case for granting bail under special conditions. We have considered and rejected petitioner's remaining arguments.


Summaries of

People ex Rel. Litman v. Warden of the Man

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 17, 2005
23 A.D.3d 258 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

People ex Rel. Litman v. Warden of the Man

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ex rel. JACK T. LITMAN on Behalf of…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 17, 2005

Citations

23 A.D.3d 258 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 8827
804 N.Y.S.2d 78

Citing Cases

Raucci v. Pollard

Petitioner appeals. The scope of our review in this habeas corpus proceeding is limited to a determination of…

People v. Schriro

The habeas court properly found that the bail court (Robert A. Sackett, J.) did not abuse its discretion in…