P., DARRYL, PEOPLE v

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

P., DARRYL, PEOPLE v

105 A.D.3d 1439, 963 N.Y.S.2d 904

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

DecidedApril 26, 2013

DocketKA 10-01178

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 105 A.D.3d 1439 (P., DARRYL, PEOPLE v) 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

P., DARRYL, PEOPLE v, 105 A.D.3d 1439, 963 N.Y.S.2d 904 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an adjudication of the Onondaga County Court (William D. Walsh, J.), *1440 rendered November 2, 2009. The adjudication revoked defendant’s sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

It is hereby ordered that the adjudication so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant was adjudicated a youthful offender based upon his plea of guilty of aggravated criminal contempt (Penal Law § 215.52) and was sentenced to five years of probation. Defendant appeals from an adjudication revoking the sentence of probation and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of 1 to 3 years of incarceration. Contrary to the People’s contention, we conclude that this appeal is not moot (cf. People v Mackey, 79 AD3d 1680, 1681 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 860 [2011]).

Contrary to defendant’s contention, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying his request for an adjournment (see People v Aikey, 94 AD3d 1485, 1486 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 956 [2012]). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, the determination of the court that he violated the terms of his probation is not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Garries, 299 AD2d 858, 858 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 558 [2002]; see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]).

Present—Smith, J.P, Fahey, Peradotto, Lindley and Whalen, JJ.

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

Appeal from an adjudication of the Onondaga County Court (William D. Walsh, J.), *1440 rendered November 2, 2009. The adjudication revoked defendant’s sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

It is hereby ordered that the adjudication so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant was adjudicated a youthful offender based upon his plea of guilty of aggravated criminal contempt (Penal Law § 215.52) and was sentenced to five years of probation. Defendant appeals from an adjudication revoking the sentence of probation and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of 1 to 3 years of incarceration. Contrary to the People’s contention, we conclude that this appeal is not moot (cf. People v Mackey, 79 AD3d 1680, 1681 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 860 [2011]).

Contrary to defendant’s contention, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying his request for an adjournment (see People v Aikey, 94 AD3d 1485, 1486 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 956 [2012]). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, the determination of the court that he violated the terms of his probation is not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Garries, 299 AD2d 858, 858 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 558 [2002]; see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]).

Present—Smith, J.P, Fahey, Peradotto, Lindley and Whalen, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 A.D.3d 1439, 963 N.Y.S.2d 904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/p-darryl-people-v-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack