People v. Bellezza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bellezza

267 A.D.2d 468, 700 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13278

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

DecidedDecember 27, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D.2d 468 (People v. Bellezza) 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. Bellezza, 267 A.D.2d 468, 700 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13278 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeals by the [469]*469defendant from three judgments of the County Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), all rendered May 7, 1997, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, burglary in the third degree, and possession of burglar’s tools under Indictment No. 974E/ 96, grand larceny in the fourth degree under Indictment No. 1113/96, and burglary in the second degree and burglary in the third degree under Indictment No. 3100/96, upon jury verdicts, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The sentences imposed were not harsh or excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either without merit, unpreserved for appellate review, or do not require reversal. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, McGinity and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeals by the [469]*469defendant from three judgments of the County Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), all rendered May 7, 1997, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, burglary in the third degree, and possession of burglar’s tools under Indictment No. 974E/ 96, grand larceny in the fourth degree under Indictment No. 1113/96, and burglary in the second degree and burglary in the third degree under Indictment No. 3100/96, upon jury verdicts, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The sentences imposed were not harsh or excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either without merit, unpreserved for appellate review, or do not require reversal. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, McGinity and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 468, 700 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bellezza-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack