People v. Beckwith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Beckwith

210 A.D.2d 491, 620 N.Y.S.2d 988

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

DecidedDecember 27, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 210 A.D.2d 491 (People v. Beckwith) 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. Beckwith, 210 A.D.2d 491, 620 N.Y.S.2d 988 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Byrne, J.), rendered April 25, 1994, revoking [492]*492a sentence of imprisonment previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant pleaded guilty to a violation of probation and the court imposed the promised sentence. Therefore, the defendant has no cause to complain that the sentence imposed is excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816, 817).

We decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to reduce the defendant’s sentence. Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Byrne, J.), rendered April 25, 1994, revoking [492]*492a sentence of imprisonment previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant pleaded guilty to a violation of probation and the court imposed the promised sentence. Therefore, the defendant has no cause to complain that the sentence imposed is excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816, 817).

We decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to reduce the defendant’s sentence. Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 A.D.2d 491, 620 N.Y.S.2d 988, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-beckwith-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack