People v. Brewer

698 N.E.2d 952, 91 N.Y.2d 999, 676 N.Y.S.2d 123, 1998 N.Y. LEXIS 1073
New York Court of Appeals·Decided May 14, 1998·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant argues that he did not receive a prompt probation revocation hearing (see, CPL 410.70 [1]) and that the trial court unreasonably delayed his sentencing (see, CPL 380.30 [1]). We disagree. Trial courts have considerable discretion in administering litigation and in managing their dockets. Given this discretion, the time between the filing of the declaration of delinquency and the final hearing was not unreasonable as a matter of law. Similarly, the shorter period between the final hearing and the sentencing was not unreasonable as a matter of law.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

People v. Brewer, 698 N.E.2d 952, 91 N.Y.2d 999, 676 N.Y.S.2d 123, 1998 N.Y. LEXIS 1073 (N.Y. 1998).

698 N.E.2d 952 (People v. Brewer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Lora
2019 NY Slip Op 8478 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Bender
24 A.D.3d 819 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
People v. Harris
301 A.D.2d 753 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
People v. Pierre-Paul
289 A.D.2d 262 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)