182 A.D. 642 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1918
On September 21, 1917, the relator was convicted upon a trial before a city magistrate sitting as a Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York of a misdemeanor, cruelty to animals. He was sentenced to pay a fine of $100, and in default thereof to stand committed to the city prison for twenty days. The learned justice at Special Term has sustained the contention of the relator that the court has power to sentence the relator to pay a fine not to exceed fifty dollars, or to imprisonment not to exceed six months, or both, as provided in section 717 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That section is contained in title 1 of part 5, headed: “ Of proceedings in Courts of Special Sessions in the Counties other than New York.” The next title is headed: “ Of the proceedings in the Courts of Special Sessions in the City of New York,” and section 741 under said title provides: “The Courts of Special Sessions in the City of New York must proceed upon a criminal charge in the manner prescribed in the last title, except as provided in the next five sections, and as otherwise specially provided.”
This section deals with the manner of procedure and does not purport to limit the jurisdiction. It also recognizes the fact that there are special provisions of law relating to the Courts of Special Sessions in the city of New York which it is not the intention of the Legislature that the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure relating to other counties sha.11 supersede.
Since the first establishment of Courts of Special Sessions in the Colony of New York, there have been distinct provisioris for such courts in the county of New York and the other counties of the State. Courts of Special Sessions were first instituted in the Colony of New York by acts passed in the Colonial Legislature in 1744, for the trial of misdemeanors, breaches of the peace and other criminal offenses under the degree of grand larceny, where the persons charged were unable to procure bail to appear at the General Sessions of the Peace, and have no substance of their own. In all the counties of the Colony except the city and county of New York, the court was composed of three justices of the peace and they or two of them agreeing had power on conviction to
By article 2 (§§ 22-30), entitled “Of trials before Courts of. Special Sessions in the City and County of New-York,” the Court of Special Sessions was to be composed of three judges of the Court of Common Pleas of whom the first judge of said court, the mayor or recorder shall be one (§ 24), and was given jurisdiction to try any person charged with having committed petit larceny, or any assault and battery not riotously, where such person shall demand to be tried by such court or shall not give bail to appear at the next Court of General Sessions (§| 22, 23), and shall upon conviction “ of the offender, sentence him to the punishment prescribed by law” (§ 25). In 1855 (Laws of 1855, chap. 337) the jurisdiction of the Court of Special Sessions in the city and county of New York was greatly enlarged; it was given exclusive jurisdiction “ to hear, determine, and punish according to law, all complaints for misdemeanors ” unless the said court should order' such complaint to be sent to the Court of General Sessions; and unless the accused when arrested and brought before the committing magistrate shall elect to have his case tried by the Court of General Sessions (§5). It would seem from these provisions that the Court of Special Sessions of the City and County of New York upon conviction could impose the same judgment that would have been imposed by the Court of General Sessions, and was not limited to the judgment that Courts
“ Section 1. In all convictions for misdemeanors, tried in the Court of Special Sessions of the Peace in and for the City and County of New York, the said Court shall have power to impose the same punishment as is authorized by law to be inflicted in like cases tried in the Court of General Sessions in said City and County.”
In 1858 (Chap. 282, § 8) the Court of Special Sessions was provided to be held by three police justices. In 1865 (Chap. 563, § 1) it was to be held by the two police justices elected respectively in the second and sixth judicial districts of the city and county of New York. In 1881 (Chap. 442) the Legislature enacted the Code of Criminal Procedure by which Courts of Special Sessions, except in the cities of New York and Albany, were given jurisdiction to try offenders for certain specified misdemeanors (§§ 56-63) and with power upon conviction to impose the punishment prescribed (§ 59), which by section 717 was provided to be by fine or imprisonment or both; but the fine could not exceed fifty dollars nor the imprisonment six months. The Court of Special Sessions in the City and County of New York is given jurisdiction “ to try and determine according to law all complaints for misdemeanors, unless the defendant elects to be tried at the Court of General Sessions, or the Court of Special Sessions sends the case to the General Sessions for trial ” (§ 64, subd. 1), and “ to impose the same punishment as is authorized by statute to be inflicted in like cases tried in the Court of General Sessions of the Peace of that City and County” (Id. subd. 4). The Legislature in 1882 enacted the' “ Consolidation Act” (Chap. 410), and section 64 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was incorporated without change in that act (Consol. Act, § 1569), and the court was thereafter composed of three police justices (Id. § 1572). Section 741 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as originally enacted, provided: “ The Court of Special Sessions, in the City and County of New York, must proceed upon a criminal charge in the manner prescribed in the last title, except as provided in the next seven sections, and by special statutes.”
The preceding title, except section 717, dealt with procedure
The powers and jurisdiction of the Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York were preserved and continued by the Inferior Criminal Courts Act (Laws of 1910, chap. 659, § 31). This historical review of the legislation affecting Courts of Special Sessions demonstrates that from their first establishment to this day such courts in the city and county of New York have differed from those held in other counties in the persons designated to hold the court, in jurisdiction of offenses and in power to sentence on conviction; that laws specially applicable to each have been enacted, but never has the jurisdiction to hear, determine and pronounce judgment of either been limited or controlled by reference to the laws applicable to the other. There has existed from the first acts of 1744 to the last act of the Legislature á clear statement of the jurisdiction and powers of each court. The Court of Special Sessions of the City of
A Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York may be held by a city magistrate for the trial of certain specified misdemeanors. (Inf. Grim. Cts. Act, art. 3A, as added by Laws of 1915, chap. 531.) As to such misdemeanors as are within its jurisdiction it has the same power to impose sentences as the Court of Special Sessions held by three justices of that court. The Court of Special Sessions held by a city magistrate is a “ Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York.” (People v. Sellaro, 178 App. Div. 27, 29; People v. Santer, 176 id. 733.) The relator was charged with cruelty to animals as defined by the Penal Law (§ 185). This was one of the classes of misdemeanors that a city magistrate holding a Court of Special Sessions was authorized to hear, determine and give judgment. (Inf. Grim. Cts. Act, art. 3A, § 43, subd. b.) Section 185 of the Penal Law declares the offense to be a misdemeanor, but it does not specify the punishment therefor. It is, however, provided by the Penal Law (§ 1937): “ A person convicted of a crime declared to be a misdemeanor, for which no other punishment is specially prescribed by this chapter, or by any other statutory provision in force at the time of the conviction and sentence, is punishable by imprisonment in a penitentiary, or county jail, for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, or by both.”
The offense of which the relator was charged being within the jurisdiction of the court, and the sentence not exceeding that which the court had power to impose, he was held on a lawful judgment and the writ of habeas corpus should have been dismissed.
The order sustaining .the writ is reversed, the writ of habeas
Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Smith and Shearn, JJ., concurred.
Order reversed, writ dismissed and prisoner remanded as stated in opinion. Order to be settled on notice.