Miller v. Rohl

170 A.D.2d 452, 565 N.Y.S.2d 732, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1429

This text of 170 A.D.2d 452 (Miller v. Rohl) 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
Miller v. Rohl, 170 A.D.2d 452, 565 N.Y.S.2d 732, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1429 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of a writ of prohibition, barring further prosecution of the petitioner under Suffolk County Indictment Numbers 1677/88, and 1678/88, in which the petitioner has moved for consolidation with a pending appeal in the case of People v Roger Miller, from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered August 18, 1989, convicting him of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty under Suffolk County Indictment Number 1688/88, and imposing sentence.

Upon the papers filed in support of the proceeding, the papers filed in opposition thereto, and the papers filed in support of the motion, it is,

Ordered and adjudged that the motion is denied and the [453]*453proceeding is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal under Suffolk County Indictment Number 1688/ 88 is decided herewith (see, People v Miller, 170 AD2d 464 [decided herewith]). The decision and order on that appeal directs the dismissal of Suffolk County Indictment Numbers 1677/88 and 1678/88. Mangano, P. J., Kunzeman, Kooper, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Miller
170 A.D.2d 464 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
170 A.D.2d 452, 565 N.Y.S.2d 732, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-rohl-nyappdiv-1991.