People v. Angle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Angle

182 A.D.2d 1028, 583 N.Y.S.2d 43, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6384

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

DecidedApril 30, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 182 A.D.2d 1028 (People v. Angle) 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. Angle, 182 A.D.2d 1028, 583 N.Y.S.2d 43, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6384 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Yesawich Jr., J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Madison County (Humphreys, J.), rendered April 17, 1991, which revoked defendant’s probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

Following violation of probation hearings, defendant was found to have broken certain conditions of his probation, his probation was revoked and he was resentenced to a one-year term of incarceration. On this appeal he challenges various evidentiary rulings and the harshness of this sentence. Inasmuch as defendant completed the maximum term of his [1029]*1029sentence on October 9, 1991, his appeal has been rendered moot (see, Matter of Hamm v Regan, 34 NY2d 992, 993; Matter of Rodriguez v Hongisto, 78 AD2d 921, 921-922). And because it is well settled that probation violation hearings are summary in nature and do not trigger the strict evidentiary rules available to a defendant in a criminal action (People v Morton, 142 AD2d 763, 764; see, CPL 410.70 [3]), defendant’s appeal does not present a recurring issue of public interest which would otherwise escape appellate review. Dismissal is accordingly appropriate (see, People ex rel. Rodriguez v LeFevre, 84 AD2d 661; cf, Matter of Gross v Henderson, 79 AD2d 1086, 1086-1087, lv denied 53 NY2d 605).

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Mahoney and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot.

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

Yesawich Jr., J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Madison County (Humphreys, J.), rendered April 17, 1991, which revoked defendant’s probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

Following violation of probation hearings, defendant was found to have broken certain conditions of his probation, his probation was revoked and he was resentenced to a one-year term of incarceration. On this appeal he challenges various evidentiary rulings and the harshness of this sentence. Inasmuch as defendant completed the maximum term of his [1029]*1029sentence on October 9, 1991, his appeal has been rendered moot (see, Matter of Hamm v Regan, 34 NY2d 992, 993; Matter of Rodriguez v Hongisto, 78 AD2d 921, 921-922). And because it is well settled that probation violation hearings are summary in nature and do not trigger the strict evidentiary rules available to a defendant in a criminal action (People v Morton, 142 AD2d 763, 764; see, CPL 410.70 [3]), defendant’s appeal does not present a recurring issue of public interest which would otherwise escape appellate review. Dismissal is accordingly appropriate (see, People ex rel. Rodriguez v LeFevre, 84 AD2d 661; cf, Matter of Gross v Henderson, 79 AD2d 1086, 1086-1087, lv denied 53 NY2d 605).

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Mahoney and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 A.D.2d 1028, 583 N.Y.S.2d 43, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6384, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-angle-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack