New York Court of Appeals, 1903

People v. Adams

New York Court of Appeals · Decided November 15, 1903 · Bartlett

19 N.Y. Crim. 425; 176 N.Y. 351

Cases that cite this one

130 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

People v. Jakira (New York Court of General Session of the Peace 1922)
Rickards v. State (Del. 1950)
Atlas Lathing Corp. v. Bennett (New York Supreme Court 1941)
People v. Wicka (New York County Courts 1921)
People v. Richter's Jewelers, Inc. (N.Y. 1943)
People v. Richer (New York County Courts 1926)
People v. Defore (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1925)
State v. Owens (Mo. 1924)
In re Horschler (New York County Courts 1921)
People v. Johnson (N.Y. 1985)
People v. Morales (New York Supreme Court 1976)
People v. Gonzales (New York Court of General Session of the Peace 1961)
Elkins v. United States (Supreme Court of the United States 1960)
People v. Lalli (N.Y. 1959)
People v. Salerno (New York Court of Special Session 1959)
On Lee v. United States (Supreme Court of the United States 1952)
Wolf v. Colorado (Supreme Court of the United States 1949)
State v. Lorenzo (R.I. 1946)
Malinski v. New York (Supreme Court of the United States 1945)
People v. Belsky (New York County Courts 1941)
People v. Kuhn (New York Court of General Session of the Peace 1939)
People v. Hines (New York Supreme Court 1938)
Pueblo v. Lebrón Bernes (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico 1934)
State v. Lapointe (N.H. 1924)
Hall v. Commonwealth (Va. 1924)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Bartlett, J.:

The appellant makes the further point, that the statute under which the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for a term, the minimum of which, shall be not less than one year, and the maximum shall be not more than one year and nine months, is unconstitutional.

Section 687a of the Penal Code was enacted in 1901, presumably in the interest of defendants who had never before' been convicted of a felony. The fixing of a maximum and minimum sentence is to be considered in connection with the law relating to prisons (§§ 74 to 83, Birdseye’s R. S. [3d ed.], vol. 2, pp. 2737, 2738,. 2739.) In brief it is provided (§ 77), that the superintendent of State prisons shall cause to be kept a record of each prisoner therein confined upon an indeterminate sentence; and if it shall appear (§ 78) to the board of commissioners of paroled prisoners that there is a reasonable probability that such prisoner will live and remain at liberty *426without violating the law, the hoard is permitted to release him on parole after service of the minimum sentence; but until the expiration of the maximum term he is not absolutely discharged, and is liable to rearrest if he violates his parole. This is a merciful exercise of legislative power which has been repeatedly approved by the Supreme Court. .This form of legislation has been sustained by the courts of many other states. The provisions to which attention has already been called, relating to the release of paroled prisoners, remove some of the objections urged by the appellant. The legislation complained of is constitutional and in the interest of the defendant who stands before the court charged with a first offense.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.