Court Opinion

ID: 9688024
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:57:40.631138+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:34.296164
License: Public Domain

Black, J.
(dissenting). The Court’s opinion, standing as typical these days for reversal of another order denying another belated application by another professional felon for review of his original conviction (March 14, 1960), was delivered to the writer December 9,1971.
When a Justice dissents, he is required to “give in writing the reasons for his dissent”. (Const 1963, art 6, § 6.) I do so regularly with detail, having found it progressively necessary in recent years; most certainly in this about-to-end year 1971. However, and since advent of the present constitution, we have construed and applied the quoted language as authorizing for cases as at bar a summary negative statement of reason. That is what Division 2 has done here (Court of Appeals order of June 4, 1970, the language of which is):
“It is ordered that the application for delayed appeal be and the same is hereby denied for lack of merit in the grounds presented;”.
*227Now that the instant appeal has been submitted and the trifling nature thereof fully exposed, I propose this time to eliminate mercifully from our printed pages still another lengthy exercise in futility. When a clear majority literally pants to vote a new round of hearings and appeals for a criminal prosecution originating more than 12 years ago,* thus setting up another precedent for more like-delayed frivolity, it would be quite bootless to write for this appeal any statement of reasons over and above that which Court of Appeals Judges Qtjinn, Bronson, and McGregor have recorded.
I vote to affirm and therefore dissent.
T. E. Brennan, J., concurred with Black, J.

 Dor enough of the details of defendant’s adventures and misadventures with the law, see the majority opinion, ante at 213.