People v. Alderman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Alderman

72 A.D.2d 586, 420 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13688

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

DecidedOctober 22, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 72 A.D.2d 586 (People v. Alderman) 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. Alderman, 72 A.D.2d 586, 420 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13688 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered December 13, 1978, convicting him of unlawful imprisonment in the second degree and public lewdness, after a nonjury trial, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of imprisonment of one year on the unlawful imprisonment conviction and 60 days on the public lewdness conviction. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentence on the unlawful imprisonment conviction to the time already served. As so modified, judgment affirmed. Under the circumstances of this case, the sentence on the unlawful [587]*587imprisonment conviction was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Mangano, J. P., Rabin, Margett and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered December 13, 1978, convicting him of unlawful imprisonment in the second degree and public lewdness, after a nonjury trial, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of imprisonment of one year on the unlawful imprisonment conviction and 60 days on the public lewdness conviction. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentence on the unlawful imprisonment conviction to the time already served. As so modified, judgment affirmed. Under the circumstances of this case, the sentence on the unlawful [587]*587imprisonment conviction was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Mangano, J. P., Rabin, Margett and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 A.D.2d 586, 420 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-alderman-nyappdiv-1979.