Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Criminal Law · MBE-tested
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Antonio Ferraro, Appellant
162 N.Y. 545·New York Court of Appeals·1900·NY
Parker, Ch. J., Cray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Martin and Vann, JJ., concur.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Antonio Ferraro, Appellant.
(Argued April 23, 1900;
decided May 1, 1900.)
Appeal—Allowance to Counsel in Capital Case—Code of Cb. Pbo. § 808. An allowance of compensation to counsel for services rendered on appeal to the Court of Appeals, in pursuance of an assignment in a capital case, is proper, although the sum of §500 has been allowed by the trial court for services rendered at the trial, as section 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, limiting such compensation to that amount, applies to the trial and appellate courts separately and not collectively.
Motion by the corporation counsel, in behalf of the comptroller of the city of Hew York, to amend an order made by the Court of Appeals on February 26, 1900. '
The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion.
John Whalen, Corporation Counsel (George Landon of counsel), for motion.
Hugo Hirsh opposed.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam.]
Per Curiam.
The defendant appealed to this court from a judgment of death pronounced against him by the County Court of Kings county, and, after deciding the appeal, we made an order allowing his counsel compensation for his services in prosecuting said appeal, in addition to the sum incurred by him for disbursements. The comptroller now moves to amend the order by striking therefrom the amount allowed for compensation, upon the ground that the allowance of the sum of $500 to counsel by the trial court for services in defending the accused at the trial exhausted the amount that can be allowed, under the statute, for services upon both the trial and the appeal. (Code Cr. Pro. § 308.)
We have repeatedly held that said section, when construed in the light of the several progressive changes made by the legislature, means that the limitation imposed by the words “ not exceeding the sum of five hundred dollars ” applies to the trial court and to the appellate court separately, and not collectively. (L. 1881, ch. 442, § 308; L. 1893, ch. 521, § 1; L. 1895, ch. 725, § 1; L. 1897, ch. 427, § 1; People v. Barone, 161 N. Y. 475, 477.)
The motion should be denied, with ten dollars costs.
Parker, Ch. J., Cray, O’Brien, Bartlett, Haight, Martin and Vann, JJ., concur.
Motion denied.