Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

14 N.Y.2d 370

People v. Codarre

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 10, 1964

New York Court of Appeals · decided 1964-07-10

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 1975

7 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“The Court concludes that it has complied with the directions of the Court of Appeals and has proceeded with extreme caution in determining whether this defendant had a defense and whether sufficient consideration was given to it. * * * 55 "It is the conclusion of the court therefore, that Edwin Codarre was legally sane in 1943 when he committed the offense based on the only accepted definition of legal sanity, i.e. `He knew the nature and quality of the act and he knew the act was wrong.' (See 1120 Penal Law). 56 "* * * Petitioner was represented by competent counsel * * *. 57 "* * * (I)t is the conclusion of this Court after reviewing all the facts that the acceptance of a plea of guilty to murder in the second degree in this case did not violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including United States of America Ex Rel. Codarre v. Gilligan, Acting Warden of Green Haven Prison, Stormville, New York

“The jury could have found the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree. It might have acquitted him on the ground of insanity had it accepted the opinion of the psychiatrist who thought he was insane. * * * [T]he Judge's decision to accept the plea was within a fair range of responsible judicial action.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including United States of America Ex Rel. Codarre v. Gilligan, Acting Warden of Green Haven Prison, Stormville, New York

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1964-07-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Bergan, J.

¶1In pursuance of the 1961 decision of this court (10 N Y 2d 361) remitting the defendant’s coram nobis application to the County Court, a trial of the issues raised in the *372proceeding has been held. The County Court has dismissed the petition on the merits and the Appellate Division has affirmed.

¶2Although the defendant was only 13 years old in 1943 when he was indicted for murder in the first degree, the indictment was valid as the law then stood and at the end of the People’s case the proof was such that the court would have been required to send the case to the jury on the murder first degree charge. On that proof the Judge could not have dismissed or reduced the charge.

¶3At this point defendant’s counsel asked the court to accept a plea of guilty to murder in the second degree. Although there was before the Judge in the conference with counsel at which the request to accept the plea was discussed an expression of medical opinion by one psychiatrist that defendant was psychotic at the time of the commission of the charged crime, three other psychiatrists, including one retained on defendant’s behalf, expressed to the Judge the view that he was sane. The Judge accepted the plea of guilty to murder second degree, and it was neither an. error of law nor deprivation of due process for him to accept the plea.

¶4The jury could have found the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree. It might have acquitted him on the ground of insanity had it accepted the opinion of the psychiatrist who thought he was insane. But the Judge should not have compelled defendant to have taken the risk of conviction for murder in the first degree against the advice and suggestion of his own counsel that a plea to a lesser degree be accepted. With the record now fully developed of what occurred at the conference in 1943, the Judge’s decision to accept the plea was within a fair range of responsible judicial action. The fact that the District Attorney had in his possession an electroencephalogram of defendant did not amount to a suppression of evidence. It was less favorable to defendant than a later one in the possession of defendant’s own lawyer.

¶5The order should be affirmed.

/14/ny2d/370 · .json · Public domain