People v. Alamo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Alamo

302 A.D.2d 332, 754 N.Y.S.2d 878, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1808

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 302 A.D.2d 332 (People v. Alamo) 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. Alamo, 302 A.D.2d 332, 754 N.Y.S.2d 878, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1808 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (David Stadtmauer, J.), rendered November 1, 2000, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly imposed the bargained-for alternative prison sentence upon defendant’s failure to complete a drug rehabilitation program, a condition of his plea bargain (see People v Avery, 85 NY2d 503, 507-508 [1995]). Defendant’s meritless excuse for unilaterally leaving the drug program did not warrant a hearing or further inquiry, and no such further proceedings were requested. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Lerner and Marlow, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (David Stadtmauer, J.), rendered November 1, 2000, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly imposed the bargained-for alternative prison sentence upon defendant’s failure to complete a drug rehabilitation program, a condition of his plea bargain (see People v Avery, 85 NY2d 503, 507-508 [1995]). Defendant’s meritless excuse for unilaterally leaving the drug program did not warrant a hearing or further inquiry, and no such further proceedings were requested. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Lerner and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

302 A.D.2d 332, 754 N.Y.S.2d 878, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1808, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-alamo-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack