People v. Booker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Booker

59 A.D.2d 600, 398 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13411

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

DecidedSeptember 27, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 59 A.D.2d 600 (People v. Booker) 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. Booker, 59 A.D.2d 600, 398 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13411 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered December 3, 1975, convicting defendant of robbery, first degree, and sentencing him to four and one-half to nine years as a predicate felon, unanimously reversed, on the law, to the extent of vacating the sentence and remanding for resentence in compliance with CPL 400.21. On the date set for sentencing, a predicate felony statement was filed with the court and a copy given to the defendant. The court then denied an adjournment sought by the defendant to enable him to controvert the statement on constitutional grounds. CPL 400.21 (subd 6) commands at least a two-day adjournment when requested after the defendant’s receipt of the statement. Substantial compliance with the section has been found when the defendant, although not physically in receipt of the statement, has had adequate and timely notice of it (see People v Bryant, 47 AD2d 51). But this defendant knew only that there was a possibility that a predicate felony statement might be filed against him and had reasonable grounds for believing that one might not be filed. On this record we cannot determine that the denial of the adjournment did not prejudice the defendant (cf. People v Presley, 49 AD2d 804). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Birns, Markewich and Lynch, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, rendered December 3, 1975, convicting defendant of robbery, first degree, and sentencing him to four and one-half to nine years as a predicate felon, unanimously reversed, on the law, to the extent of vacating the sentence and remanding for resentence in compliance with CPL 400.21. On the date set for sentencing, a predicate felony statement was filed with the court and a copy given to the defendant. The court then denied an adjournment sought by the defendant to enable him to controvert the statement on constitutional grounds. CPL 400.21 (subd 6) commands at least a two-day adjournment when requested after the defendant’s receipt of the statement. Substantial compliance with the section has been found when the defendant, although not physically in receipt of the statement, has had adequate and timely notice of it (see People v Bryant, 47 AD2d 51). But this defendant knew only that there was a possibility that a predicate felony statement might be filed against him and had reasonable grounds for believing that one might not be filed. On this record we cannot determine that the denial of the adjournment did not prejudice the defendant (cf. People v Presley, 49 AD2d 804). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Birns, Markewich and Lynch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.D.2d 600, 398 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-booker-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack