Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

259 N.Y. 635

182 N.E 213

People v. Roper

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 21, 1932

New York Court of Appeals · decided 1932-06-21

Relies on People v. . Hayes · People Ex Rel. v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1932-06-21

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 1983

1 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

30193219401950196019701980decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 Sections 93 and 94 of the General Construction Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 22) have no application here. They provide merely a principle of construction to be applied in determining the scope of legislation which expressly or impliedly repeals earlier statutes. In the absence of evidence of contrary intent such legislation is not to be given retroactive effect. (People ex rel. City of Buffalo v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co., 156 N. Y. 570.) They apply with special force to statutes which otherwise would be ex post facto or would deprive persons of substantial rights. Here the Legislature has reduced the maximum sentence which the court might impose upon conviction for robbery in the first degree. Such statutes have never been regarded as ex post facto laws. They are applicable to offenses previously committed. (See People v. Hayes, 140 N. Y. 484.) Many circumstances point unmistakably to the conclusion that such was the legislative intent here.

¶2 Motion denied.

/259/ny/635 · .json · Public domain