People v. Asbury

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Asbury

59 A.D.2d 767, 398 N.Y.S.2d 856, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13805

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

DecidedOctober 24, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 59 A.D.2d 767 (People v. Asbury) 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. Asbury, 59 A.D.2d 767, 398 N.Y.S.2d 856, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13805 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered November 29, 1976, convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of three years. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentence to a five-year period of probation. As so modified, judgment affirmed, and cause remitted to the Criminal Term to fix the conditions of probation and for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). Under the circumstances, the sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Damiani, J. P., Shapiro, Mollen and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered November 29, 1976, convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of three years. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentence to a five-year period of probation. As so modified, judgment affirmed, and cause remitted to the Criminal Term to fix the conditions of probation and for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). Under the circumstances, the sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Damiani, J. P., Shapiro, Mollen and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.D.2d 767, 398 N.Y.S.2d 856, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13805, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-asbury-nyappdiv-1977.