From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Simonson v. Cahn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 22, 1969
33 A.D.2d 790 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)

Opinion

December 22, 1969


Proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to prohibit the respondent District Attorney from prosecuting, and the respondent Judges from entertaining or otherwise assuming jurisdiction of, a criminal action against one Clarence Smith for violation of sections 220.05 Penal and 265.05 Penal of the Penal Law until a Grand Jury of Nassau County returns an indictment in the matter. Application granted, without costs; the respondent District Attorney is hereby restrained from prosecuting, and the respondent Judges of the County Court, Nassau County, are hereby restrained from entertaining or assuming jurisdiction of, the criminal action against Clarence Smith upon the charges in question until a Grand Jury of Nassau County returns an indictment against him upon said charges. It is the law of this State that a defendant may not be prosecuted for a felony unless he has been indicted by a Grand Jury. Until the Grand Jury has acted, no court can acquire jurisdiction to try the charge. A defendant's waiver of this constitutional right and his consent to be prosecuted upon an information cannot confer jurisdiction to proceed and any conviction thereafter obtained would be a nullity ( People ex rel. Battista v. Christian, 249 N.Y. 314, 319-321; see People ex rel. Wachowicz v. Martin, 293 N.Y. 361, 365). Christ, Acting P.J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Simonson v. Cahn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 22, 1969
33 A.D.2d 790 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
Case details for

Simonson v. Cahn

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of FRANKLIN E. SIMONSON, as Foreman of the December Term…

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

Date published: Dec 22, 1969

Citations

33 A.D.2d 790 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)

Citing Cases

King v. State

Appellant does not take issue with the act that certain rights are waivable by an accused, but contends an…