People v. Bispo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bispo

65 A.D.3d 692, 883 N.Y.S.2d 914

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

DecidedAugust 25, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 65 A.D.3d 692 (People v. Bispo) 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. Bispo, 65 A.D.3d 692, 883 N.Y.S.2d 914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the People from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hollie, J.), imposed February 14, 2008, pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Act of 2005 (L 2005, ch 643, § 1), after a hearing, upon the defendant’s conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty.

[693]*693Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

As we have previously held in this matter, there is no merit to the People’s contention that a defendant from whom a merit-time allowance has been withheld pursuant to Correction Law § 803 (1) (d) (iv) is not eligible for resentencing under the Drug Law Reform Act of 2005 (see L 2005, ch 643, § 1; People v Bispo, 47 AD3d 641, 642 [2008]; People v Sanders, 36 AD3d 944, 946 [2007]; People v Quinones, 11 Misc 3d 582, 595-596 [2005]; cf. People v Williams, 48 AD3d 858, 859-860 [2008]; People v Paniagua, 45 AD3d 98 [2007]). Spolzino, J.P., Skelos, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the People from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hollie, J.), imposed February 14, 2008, pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Act of 2005 (L 2005, ch 643, § 1), after a hearing, upon the defendant’s conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty.

[693]*693Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

As we have previously held in this matter, there is no merit to the People’s contention that a defendant from whom a merit-time allowance has been withheld pursuant to Correction Law § 803 (1) (d) (iv) is not eligible for resentencing under the Drug Law Reform Act of 2005 (see L 2005, ch 643, § 1; People v Bispo, 47 AD3d 641, 642 [2008]; People v Sanders, 36 AD3d 944, 946 [2007]; People v Quinones, 11 Misc 3d 582, 595-596 [2005]; cf. People v Williams, 48 AD3d 858, 859-860 [2008]; People v Paniagua, 45 AD3d 98 [2007]). Spolzino, J.P., Skelos, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 A.D.3d 692, 883 N.Y.S.2d 914, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bispo-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack