People ex rel. Jin H. Kim, o/b/o Martin Batista v Commissioner of Corrections

Annotate this Case
People ex rel. Jin H. Kim, o/b/o Martin Batista v Commissioner of Corrections 2006 NY Slip Op 04874 [30 AD3d 549] Decided on June 13, 2006 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on June 13, 2006
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
STEPHEN G. CRANE, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
REINALDO E. RIVERA
ROBERT J. LUNN, JJ.
2006-05592 DECISION & JUDGMENT

[*1]The People, etc., ex rel. Jin H. Kim, o/b/o Martin Batista, petitioner,

v

Commissioner of Corrections, et al., respondents.




Jin H. Kim, Flushing, N.Y., petitioner pro se.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y.
(Annette B. Almazan of counsel),
respondent pro se.

Writ of habeas corpus in the nature of an application to reduce bail upon Queens County Indictment No. 1888/05.

ADJUDGED that the writ is sustained, without costs or disbursements, to the extent of reducing bail on Queens County Indictment No. 1888/05 from the sum of $100,000 to the sum of $25,000, which may be posted in the form of an insurance company bail bond in that sum or by depositing the same sum as a cash bail alternative, and upon (1) condition that the petitioner refrain from operating a motor vehicle while released on bail, and (2) any conditions previously imposed by the Supreme Court, Queens County, in conjunction with the original bail set on Queens County Indictment No. 1888/05; in the event that the bail of $25,000, which was previously set, has not been exonerated and returned to the person who posted it, then, the bail already posted shall satisfy the $25,000 bail required.
CRANE, J.P., LUCIANO, RIVERA and LUNN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.