Hyperlawhypertext legal database People v. Smith 28 N.Y.S. 912

← Cases

People v. Smith

28 N.Y.S. 912 Court N.Y. Gen. Term Decision date 1894-05-14 English

Delivered by PRATT, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 912
PEOPLE v. SMITH.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
May 14, 1894.)

Headnote

Criminal Law—Conviction under Plea oe Guilty.
Code Or. Proe. § 332, providing- that no conviction shall be had on the plea of guilty in cases where the crime is punishable by death or imprisonment for life, does not forbid a conviction on a plea of guilty of manslaughter in the second degree, though the indictment was for murder in the first degree.
Appeal from court of oyer and terminer, Kings county.
William J. Smith was indicted for murder in the first degree, and pleaded guilty of manslaughter in the second degree, and was sentenced to the penitentiary for a term of 10 years. He now applies for writ of habeas corpus, alleging that his imprisonment was illegal. The writ was dismissed, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Argued before BROWN, P. J., and DYKMAN and PRATT, JJ.
Stapleton & Miles, for appellant.
James W. Ridgway, Dist. Atty., for the People.

There is no merit in the contention urged by. the appellant. Section 35 of the Penal Code provides as follows: “Upon the trial of an indictment the prisoner may be convicted of the crime charged therein, or of a lesser degree of the same crime, or an

p. 913
attempt to commit the crime so charged, or an attempt to commit a lesser degree of the same crime.” This section speaks for itself. Section 332, Code Or. Proc., provides that no conviction shall be had upon a plea in cases where the crime is punishable by death or state prison for life. The appellant was not convicted of any such crime, but of one punishable for a term of years. Section 332 does not provide that a man may not plead guilty of any crime whatever, but simply that no man shall be convicted upon such a plea where the punishment is by death or imprisonment for life. The matter is too simple and plain to require argument. It may be added that courts are bound to decide under well-settled rules of statutory construction, without regard to what was the intention of the man who drafted the law. Order affirmed. AH concur.