Case Name: In the Matter of Agnes Scranton, Appellant, v. Supreme Court of the State of New York et al., Respondents. (Two Proceedings.)
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1975-02-27
Citations: 36 N.Y.2d 704
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Agnes Scranton, Appellant, v. Supreme Court of the State of New York et al., Respondents. (Two Proceedings.)
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 36
Pages: 704–706

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Agnes Scranton, Appellant, v. Supreme Court of the State of New York et al., Respondents. (Two Proceedings.)
Argued February 11, 1975;
decided February 27, 1975.
Eleanor Jackson Piel for appellant.
Richard H. Kuh, District Attorney (Jonathan Lovett and Lewis R. Friedman of counsel), respondent pro se.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Samuel A. Hirshowitz and David H. Berman of counsel), for Justices of Supreme Court, respondents.

Opinion:
Memorandum. The judgments of the Appellate Division should be affirmed,, without costs. A claim of a denial of a speedy trial is not cognizable in an application pursuant to CPLB article 78 for a judgment prohibiting a District Attorney and the Justices of the Supreme Court from proceeding on an indictment. (Matter of Watts v. Supreme Ct. of State of N. Y., 28 N Y 2d 714; Matter of Lee v. County Ct. of Erie County, 27 N Y 2d 432, 437; Matter of Blake v. Hogan, 25 N Y 2d 747.) While a double jeopardy claim may be raised in a prohibition proceeding (Matter of State of New York v. King, 36 N Y 2d 59, at p. 64; Matter of Kraemer v. County Ct. of Suffolk County, 6 N Y 2d 363), this petition should nevertheless be denied. The petitioner was not placed in jeopardy despite the fact that three jurors had been sworn before a mistrial was declared. (CPL 40.30, subd. 1, par. [b].)
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.
Judgments affirmed.