Cohen v. Kearney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cohen v. Kearney

119 A.D.2d 821, 501 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55762

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 28, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 119 A.D.2d 821 (Cohen v. Kearney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cohen v. Kearney, 119 A.D.2d 821, 501 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55762 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to direct the respondents to calculate a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the appellant to run concurrently with a prior undischarged term of imprisonment, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Rosenblatt, J.), dated December 1, 1981, which dismissed the petition.

Appeal dismissed as moot, without costs or disbursements.

Inasmuch as the petitioner has already served his sentence, any question regarding the sentencing court’s failure to expressly mention that, pursuant to Penal Law § 70.25 (2-a), his sentence was to run consecutively with an undischarged term on a prior sentence, has been rendered academic, and the instant proceeding is, accordingly, dismissed as moot. Rubin, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to direct the respondents to calculate a sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the appellant to run concurrently with a prior undischarged term of imprisonment, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Rosenblatt, J.), dated December 1, 1981, which dismissed the petition.

Appeal dismissed as moot, without costs or disbursements.

Inasmuch as the petitioner has already served his sentence, any question regarding the sentencing court’s failure to expressly mention that, pursuant to Penal Law § 70.25 (2-a), his sentence was to run consecutively with an undischarged term on a prior sentence, has been rendered academic, and the instant proceeding is, accordingly, dismissed as moot. Rubin, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 A.D.2d 821, 501 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55762, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-kearney-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack