People v. Birchette

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Birchette

285 A.D. 1076, 139 N.Y.S.2d 720, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6707

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

DecidedApril 16, 1955

StatusPublished

This text of 285 A.D. 1076 (People v. Birchette) 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. Birchette, 285 A.D. 1076, 139 N.Y.S.2d 720, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6707 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the County Court, Kings County, convicting her of manslaughter in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and sentencing her to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of five to ten years; and from an order denying her motion to suspend the operation of the sentence or to suspend the sentence. Judgment modified on the facts by reducing the sentence to an indeterminate term of one year and six months to ten years. As so modified judgment unanimously affirmed. In the light of the facts and circumstances of this case, the sentence was excessive. No separate appeal lies from the order, which has been reviewed on the appeal from the judgment of conviction. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Schmidt, Beldock and Murphy, JJ.

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

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the County Court, Kings County, convicting her of manslaughter in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and sentencing her to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of five to ten years; and from an order denying her motion to suspend the operation of the sentence or to suspend the sentence. Judgment modified on the facts by reducing the sentence to an indeterminate term of one year and six months to ten years. As so modified judgment unanimously affirmed. In the light of the facts and circumstances of this case, the sentence was excessive. No separate appeal lies from the order, which has been reviewed on the appeal from the judgment of conviction. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Schmidt, Beldock and Murphy, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D. 1076, 139 N.Y.S.2d 720, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6707, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-birchette-nyappdiv-1955.