People v. Benezra

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Benezra

262 A.D.2d 327, 689 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5846

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

DecidedJune 1, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 262 A.D.2d 327 (People v. Benezra) 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. Benezra, 262 A.D.2d 327, 689 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5846 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from (1) an amended judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), rendered January 27, 1997, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the Supreme Court, New York County (Adlerberg, J.), upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previ[328]*328ous conviction of attempted robbery in the third degree, and (2) a resentence of the same court, imposed February 13, 1998.

Ordered that the amended judgment and the resentence are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the resentence imposed by the court upon the defendant’s admission to a violation of probation was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from (1) an amended judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), rendered January 27, 1997, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the Supreme Court, New York County (Adlerberg, J.), upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previ[328]*328ous conviction of attempted robbery in the third degree, and (2) a resentence of the same court, imposed February 13, 1998.

Ordered that the amended judgment and the resentence are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the resentence imposed by the court upon the defendant’s admission to a violation of probation was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D.2d 327, 689 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-benezra-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack