From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Candella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 19, 1975
49 A.D.2d 800 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)

Opinion

September 19, 1975

Appeal from the Herkimer County Court.

Present. — Marsh, P.J., Mahoney, Goldman, Del Vecchio and Witmer, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed, plea vacated and matter remitted to County Court, Herkimer County, for a hearing pursuant to CPL 730.30 in accordance with the following memorandum: To the charge of burglary and attempted rape, first degree, defendant pleaded guilty of attempted rape, first degree, and was sentenced to an indeterminate term not to exceed 10 years at Attica. Before the guilty plea the court appointed two psychiatrists to examine defendant and report on his ability to participate in his trial, and it appears that on the same day of those appointments the psychiatrists signed a form report that "defendant does not as a result of mental disease or defect lack capacity to understand the proceedings against him or to assist in his defense" and that the "defendant (is) (is not) a dangerous incapacitated person". No explanation of the examination or of the findings was made in the report. The record discloses that defendant's assigned counsel and the District Attorney knew of defendant's physical and mental limitations, and the presentence report fully apprised the court thereof. Nevertheless, neither counsel nor the court undertook to conduct a hearing to ascertain the extent of the mental examination made of defendant and his ability to participate in his trial, as provided by statute (CPL 730.20, subd 2). The defendant's conduct and lifelong history of mental limitation, which included confinement for several years in mental institutions, and the sparse record herein present questions as to his capability of understanding the charge against him and of participating in his defense. In the interest of justice a hearing is mandated to determine such capability (see People v Jackson, 30 A.D.2d 845). After such hearing, if defendant is found capable of understanding the charge and of assisting in his defense, he should be permitted to replead.


Summaries of

People v. Candella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 19, 1975
49 A.D.2d 800 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)
Case details for

People v. Candella

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOSEPH PHILIP…

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

Date published: Sep 19, 1975

Citations

49 A.D.2d 800 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)

Citing Cases

Silverstein v. Henderson

And New York Criminal Procedure Law § 730.30(4) specifically requires the court to order a hearing on its own…

People v. Moore

Here the record reflects that at the time he entered his guilty plea, defendant was still taking the same…