People v. Agrillo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Agrillo

57 A.D.2d 869, 394 N.Y.S.2d 243, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12097

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

DecidedMay 9, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 A.D.2d 869 (People v. Agrillo) 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

People v. Agrillo, 57 A.D.2d 869, 394 N.Y.S.2d 243, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12097 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County, imposed January 26, 1977, upon his conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of four years. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing it to a period of imprisonment of 60 days and probation for an additional 4 years and 10 months. As so modified, sentence affirmed and case remitted to the County Court to fix the conditions of probation. The sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello and Latham, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County, imposed January 26, 1977, upon his conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of four years. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing it to a period of imprisonment of 60 days and probation for an additional 4 years and 10 months. As so modified, sentence affirmed and case remitted to the County Court to fix the conditions of probation. The sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello and Latham, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 869, 394 N.Y.S.2d 243, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-agrillo-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack