Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

MATTER JAMES BLAKE AND JAMES P. EDSTROM v. FRANK S. HOGAN (06/02/69)

COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK 1969.NY.41817 <http://www.versuslaw.com>; 250 N.E.2d 568; 25 N.Y.2d 747 decided: June 2, 1969. IN THE MATTER OF JAMES BLAKE AND JAMES P. EDSTROM, APPELLANTSv.FRANK S. HOGAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR NEW YORK COUNTY, ET AL., RESPONDENTS Matter of Blake v. Hogan, 32 A.D.2d 611, affirmed. John M. Armentano for appellants. Frank S. Hogan, District Attorney (Alan Scribner and Michael R. Juviler of counsel), for respondent. Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel and Jasen concur.


Matter of Blake v. Hogan, 32 A.D.2d 611, affirmed.

Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel and Jasen concur.

 Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs. The record, in our view, supports the conclusion -- reached by the Appellate Division when it denied the petitioners-appellants' motion in the criminal case to dismiss the indictment -- that there had been no denial of the constitutional right to a speedy trial in view of the fact that they had acquiesced in the delay complained of. On the procedural issue, we do not believe that the extraordinary remedy of prohibition is proper under the circumstances of this case.

Disposition

Order affirmed.

19690602

© 1998 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.