People v. Bergman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bergman

56 A.D.2d 1225, 866 N.Y.S.2d 918

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

DecidedNovember 14, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 56 A.D.2d 1225 (People v. Bergman) 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. Bergman, 56 A.D.2d 1225, 866 N.Y.S.2d 918 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a judgment of the Oswego County Court (Walter W. Hafner, Jr., J.), rendered April 17, 2007. The judgment revoked defendant’s sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment revoking the sentence of probation imposed upon his conviction of attempted assault in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.05) and sentencing him to a term of imprisonment. We reject defendant’s contention that the People failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant violated the conditions of his probation (see CPL 410.70 [1]; People v Maldonado, 44 AD3d 793 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 1035 [2008]), and “the decision to revoke his probation will not be disturbed, [absent a] ‘clear abuse of discretion’ ” (People v Barber, 280 AD2d 691, 694 [2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 825 [2001]). We reject the further contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel inasmuch as “the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of [this] case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, reveal that [defense counsel] provided meaningful representation” (People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present — Scudder, PJ., Martoche, Centra, Lunn and Gorski, JJ.

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

— Appeal from a judgment of the Oswego County Court (Walter W. Hafner, Jr., J.), rendered April 17, 2007. The judgment revoked defendant’s sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment revoking the sentence of probation imposed upon his conviction of attempted assault in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.05) and sentencing him to a term of imprisonment. We reject defendant’s contention that the People failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant violated the conditions of his probation (see CPL 410.70 [1]; People v Maldonado, 44 AD3d 793 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 1035 [2008]), and “the decision to revoke his probation will not be disturbed, [absent a] ‘clear abuse of discretion’ ” (People v Barber, 280 AD2d 691, 694 [2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 825 [2001]). We reject the further contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel inasmuch as “the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of [this] case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, reveal that [defense counsel] provided meaningful representation” (People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]). Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present — Scudder, PJ., Martoche, Centra, Lunn and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 A.D.2d 1225, 866 N.Y.S.2d 918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bergman-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack