Legal Opinion
People v. Brim
New York Court of General Session of the Peace
Decided April 6, 1960PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThomas Dickens, J.
In order to attain a favorable outcome of this coram nobis motion, defendant relies upon (a) the illegality of trickery employed by his assigned counsel in persuading defendant to plead guilty while testifying in his own defense; and (b) an abuse of discretion exercised by -the Judge in refusing to permit defendant to withdraw this plea before judgment.
The trickery, complains defendant, took root when his attorney “Mr. Ginsberg made the Promise that if your Petitioner would take a Plea to the allege [sic] crime of Robbery 3d degree, that he (Mr. Ginsberg) had arranged with a one Harold X.…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Cancemi v. . the PeopleNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Laidlaw v. . SageNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- People v. Quill, New York County Courts1958
- People v. CodarreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1955
- People v. RodriguezNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1958
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Battle v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1980
- State v. RoseSupreme Court of Missouri · 1969
- People v. ElfeNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1962
- People v. WilliamsNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1962
- People v. BofillNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1962
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.