Hogan v. Ascione

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hogan v. Ascione

31 A.D.2d 517, 294 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2963

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

DecidedNovember 7, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.2d 517 (Hogan v. Ascione) 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

Hogan v. Ascione, 31 A.D.2d 517, 294 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2963 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

of the District Attorney under article 78 of the CPLR, verified October 10, 1968, granted, the sentence imposed upon respondent Benito Ramos annulled, and respondent Alfred M. Ascione ordered to resentence Ramos in accordance with the law. As Ramos was convicted, among other counts, of robbery in the first degree while armed with a dangerous weapon, section 2188 of the former Penal Law, which i^ applicable to this case, rendered mandatory the execution of a prison sentence upon him, and he should be resentenced in accordance therewith (Matter of Bennett v. Merritt, 173 Misc. 355, affd. 261 App. Div. 824, affd. 286 N. Y. 647; People v. Procito, 261 N. Y. 376; Matter of Stebbins v. Sherwood, 148 Misc. 763, affd. 241 App. Div. 615). An article 78 proceeding is an available remedy for the People to invoke (Matter of Bennett v. Merritt, supra; Matter of Dodd v. Martin, 248 N. Y. 394; Matter of Gropsey v. Tiernan, 172 App. Div. 435). Concur—Botein, P. J., Eager, Steuer, Capozzoli and McNally, JJ.

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

of the District Attorney under article 78 of the CPLR, verified October 10, 1968, granted, the sentence imposed upon respondent Benito Ramos annulled, and respondent Alfred M. Ascione ordered to resentence Ramos in accordance with the law. As Ramos was convicted, among other counts, of robbery in the first degree while armed with a dangerous weapon, section 2188 of the former Penal Law, which i^ applicable to this case, rendered mandatory the execution of a prison sentence upon him, and he should be resentenced in accordance therewith (Matter of Bennett v. Merritt, 173 Misc. 355, affd. 261 App. Div. 824, affd. 286 N. Y. 647; People v. Procito, 261 N. Y. 376; Matter of Stebbins v. Sherwood, 148 Misc. 763, affd. 241 App. Div. 615). An article 78 proceeding is an available remedy for the People to invoke (Matter of Bennett v. Merritt, supra; Matter of Dodd v. Martin, 248 N. Y. 394; Matter of Gropsey v. Tiernan, 172 App. Div. 435). Concur—Botein, P. J., Eager, Steuer, Capozzoli and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.2d 517, 294 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2963, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hogan-v-ascione-nyappdiv-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack