From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Alphonso

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 26, 1976
38 N.Y.2d 923 (N.Y. 1976)

Opinion

Argued February 19, 1976

Decided February 26, 1976

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, GERALD P. CULKIN, J.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney of New York County (Robert M. Pitler and Peter L. Zimroth of counsel), appellant pro se, in the first above-entitled proceeding.

Herman Kaufman and Lewis R. Friedman for respondent in the first above-entitled proceeding.

Arnold E. Wallach, Michael Washor and Aaron Schacher for appellants in the second above-entitled proceeding.

Eugene Gold, District Attorney of Kings County (Elliott Schulder of counsel), respondent pro se, in the second above-entitled proceeding.


In Alphonso C., on application of the District Attorney of New York County, Supreme Court directed the respondent to appear in a lineup to be held at the New York County District Attorney's office. In Angelo G., on similar application by the District Attorney of Kings County, Supreme Court directed each of the appellants to provide a handwriting exemplar at the office of the Kings County District Attorney. No criminal action had been commenced against any of the individuals to whom the Supreme Court orders were addressed nor in either case was it claimed that the discovery was incident to any other pending criminal action or to proceedings before any Grand Jury. The relief was sought as an aid in investigation of an alleged attempted homicide in one case and of alleged forgery, grand larceny and falsifying business records in the other. On appeals the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed the New York County order and the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the Kings County orders.

Each of the orders obtained at nisi prius was granted on a novel theory involving a criminal investigation and the proceeding in which the order was issued was therefore a criminal proceeding (CPL 1.20, subd 18, par [b]; Matter of Santangello v People, 38 N.Y.2d 536). There being no statutory authorization for direct appellate review, the orders of Supreme Court are not appealable and the appeals taken therefrom should have been dismissed (CPL 1.10; Matter of Santangello v People, supra).

Accordingly, the appeals to this court should be dismissed and the cases remitted to the Appellate Divisions with directions to dismiss the appeals taken to those courts.

Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur in Per Curiam opinion.

In Matter of Alphonso C. (Morgenthau): Appeal dismissed, without costs, and case remitted to the Appellate Division, First Department, with directions to dismiss the appeal taken to that court.

In Matter of District Attorney of Kings County v Angelo G.: Appeal dismissed, without costs, and case remitted to the Appellate Division, Second Department, with directions to dismiss the appeal taken to that court.


Summaries of

Matter of Alphonso

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 26, 1976
38 N.Y.2d 923 (N.Y. 1976)
Case details for

Matter of Alphonso

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ALPHONSO C., Respondent. ROBERT M. MORGENTHAU, as…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 26, 1976

Citations

38 N.Y.2d 923 (N.Y. 1976)
382 N.Y.S.2d 980
346 N.E.2d 819

Citing Cases

In re of an Investigation into the Death of Jon L.

In this context, we now are called upon to determine the extremely sensitive issue of whether a suspect in a…

Matter Abrams

His argument is premised on the rule that direct appellate review of orders issued in a criminal proceeding…