People v. McLemore, 73 N.Y.2d 340 (1989)
When a defendant is deprived of their right to appeal due to state action and the records of the trial are lost, making reconstruction or a new trial impossible, the conviction must be vacated and the indictment dismissed, even after a significant passage of time.
Summary
McLemore sought to reverse a 1963 New York assault conviction, which was used as an aggravating factor in a Mississippi murder trial where he was sentenced to death. He argued that he was never advised of his right to appeal the 1963 conviction and that the State thwarted his attempts to obtain review. The New York Court of Appeals held that because McLemore was denied his right to appeal due to state action and the trial records were lost, making a new trial impossible, the conviction was vacated, and the indictment dismissed.
Facts
In 1963, McLemore was convicted of assault in New York.
McLemore was not advised of his right to appeal the assault conviction.
The 1963 New York conviction was later used as an aggravating factor in a Mississippi murder trial, where McLemore was sentenced to death.
McLemore made several attempts to appeal the 1963 conviction pro se, but these efforts were unsuccessful due to actions by the State.
The records of McLemore’s 1963 trial were lost.
Procedural History
McLemore sought post-conviction relief in Mississippi, challenging the use of the 1963 New York conviction.
He then sought to reverse the 1963 New York assault conviction.
The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment of resentence, determining that review of the underlying 1963 conviction was unavailable.
The case was appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
Whether the passage of time bars an appeal of a conviction when the defendant was not advised of their right to appeal, made diligent attempts to appeal pro se, and was prevented from obtaining review by the State.
Whether vacatur of the conviction and dismissal of the indictment is the appropriate remedy when the trial records are lost, and neither reconstruction nor a new trial is possible.
Holding
Yes, because the defendant’s right to appeal was thwarted by the state, and the conviction was used as an aggravating factor in a capital case. The passage of time does not bar appeal in these circumstances.
Yes, because the loss of trial records and the impossibility of reconstruction or a new trial leaves vacatur of the conviction and dismissal of the indictment as the only available remedy.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals found that the passage of time did not bar the appeal due to the unusual circumstances: McLemore was never advised of his right to appeal, he made diligent pro se attempts to appeal, and the State prevented him from obtaining review. The court stated, “It is undisputed that the actions of this State prevented defendant from ever obtaining the review of the conviction to which he was entitled.”
The Court distinguished its prior holding in People v. Corso, noting that Corso did not involve a situation where the defendant had made timely efforts to raise an appealable issue before the statute imposing time limitations was adopted.
Because the trial records were lost, making reconstruction or a new trial impossible, the Court determined that the only available remedy was vacatur of the conviction and dismissal of the indictment. The court cited People v. Rivera in support of this remedy.
The court emphasized the People’s concession that McLemore had raised appealable issues with possible merit and that the records were lost preventing reconstruction or a new trial. This concession significantly influenced the Court’s decision to reverse the Appellate Division’s order.