People v. Beigelman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Beigelman

202 A.D.2d 602, 610 N.Y.S.2d 817

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

DecidedMarch 21, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 202 A.D.2d 602 (People v. Beigelman) 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. Beigelman, 202 A.D.2d 602, 610 N.Y.S.2d 817 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), rendered December 16, 1992, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the sentence and plea are vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings on the indictment.

As the People correctly concede, as part of a plea bargain, the court improperly agreed to place the defendant on interim probation by postponing his sentence to allow him to enter a drug treatment program, and promising him that it would vacate his guilty plea if he successfully completed the program (see, People v Rodney E., 77 NY2d 672; People v Johnson, 197 AD2d 638). Mangano, P. J., Balletta, O’Brien, Hart 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 a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), rendered December 16, 1992, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the sentence and plea are vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings on the indictment.

As the People correctly concede, as part of a plea bargain, the court improperly agreed to place the defendant on interim probation by postponing his sentence to allow him to enter a drug treatment program, and promising him that it would vacate his guilty plea if he successfully completed the program (see, People v Rodney E., 77 NY2d 672; People v Johnson, 197 AD2d 638). Mangano, P. J., Balletta, O’Brien, Hart and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 602, 610 N.Y.S.2d 817, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-beigelman-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack