
    The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Albert Shenandoah, Appellant.
    Argued November 16, 1960;
    decided January 12, 1961.
    
      
      D. Charles O’Brien for appellant.
    I. The Court of Special Sessions was without jurisdiction in that the alleged information was defective as a matter of law. (People v. James, 4 N Y 2d 482; People v. Scott, 3 N Y 2d 148.) II. Defendant was deprived of his constitutional and statutory rights to counsel on arraignment. (People v. Banner, 5 N Y 2d 109; People v. Marincic, 2 N Y 2d 181; People v. Palmer, 296 N. Y. 324; People v. McLaughlin, 291 N. Y. 480.) III. It was error for the County Court to consider the so-called supplemental return.
    
      Arthur W. Wilson, District Attorney (Barry B. Hill of counsel), for respondent.
    I. The Court of Special Sessions had jurisdiction because the information was sufficient as a matter of law. (People v. James, 4 N Y 2d 482; People v. O’Neil, 303 N. Y. 747; People v. Bertram, 302 N. Y. 526; People v. Belcher, 302 N. Y. 529; People ex rel. Livingston v. Wyatt, 186 N. Y. 383; People v. Chambers, 189 Misc. 502; People v. Banner, 5 Misc 2d 355; People v. Scott, 3 N Y 2d 148; People v. Brous, 296 N. Y. 1028.) II. Defendant was duly advised of his right to counsel and to an adjournment to procure counsel as required by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (People v. Marincic, 2 N Y 2d 181; People v. Palmer, 296 N. Y. 324.) III. The County Court had authority to request and consider a supplemental return. IV. An appellate court must accept a return and a further or amended return as conclusive of the facts stated therein. (People v. Chambers, 189 Misc. 502; People v. Mason, 307 N. Y. 570; People v. Jenkins, 21 Misc 2d 267; People v. Barbano, 10 Misc 2d 847; People v. Freer, 171 Misc. 478; People v. Scutt, 160 Misc. 25; People v. Decker, 156 Misc. 156; People v. Helmes, 144 Misc. 695; People v. Newman, 137 Misc. 267.)
   Per Curiam.

Defendant, a 17-year-old boy, who had never had any difficulty with the police, was arrested at his home at 4 o’clock in the morning for an alleged $12 theft, and removed to the home of the Justice of the Peace, where an alleged confession was elicited from him immediately prior to his arraignment, which confession was sworn to before the Justice. A guilty plea was then taken from him, and he was sentenced forthwith to the penitentiary. This was so gross a violation of his fundamental rights as to require a reversal. Furthermore, the County Court should not have taken the supplemental return after argument of the appeal without notice to appellant’s counsel.

The judgment appealed from should be reversed, the judgment of conviction set aside, and the case remanded to the court of original jurisdiction for arraignment and further proceedings.

Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Fboessel, Van Voobhis, Burke and Fosteb concur.

Judgment reversed and matter remitted for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion herein.  