From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Diamond

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Oct 1, 1963
41 Misc. 2d 35 (N.Y. App. Term 1963)

Opinion

October 1, 1963

Appeal from the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Queens County, THOMAS FITZPATRICK, J.

David H. Deitsch for appellant.

Frank D. O'Connor, District Attorney ( May E. O'Shea of counsel), for respondent.


Although the issuance of the summons was extraterritorial, when the defendant appeared before the court to answer a valid information filed against him, pleaded "not guilty" thereto and proceeded to trial, the court acquired jurisdiction over his person ( People v. Yerman, 138 Misc. 272; People v. Hagan, 138 Misc. 771, affd. 235 App. Div. 784; People v. Preble, 39 Misc.2d 411). This court does not agree with the decision in People v. Haber ( 20 Misc.2d 272) relied upon by the defendant. It is not consonant with the established case law nor is there any provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure or the New York City Criminal Courts Act permitting a defendant in a criminal case to challenge the jurisdiction of the court over his person by a "special appearance". The judgment of conviction should be affirmed.

Concur — BENJAMIN, GULOTTA and SCHWARTZWALD, JJ.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Diamond

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Oct 1, 1963
41 Misc. 2d 35 (N.Y. App. Term 1963)
Case details for

People v. Diamond

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. STEVEN DIAMOND…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Oct 1, 1963

Citations

41 Misc. 2d 35 (N.Y. App. Term 1963)
244 N.Y.S.2d 901

Citing Cases

People v. MacFarlene Co.

Defendants have not shown — and I cannot find — any case law that would authorize me to dismiss this case…