People v. Carrera

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Carrera

67 A.D.2d 734, 412 N.Y.S.2d 586, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10365

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

DecidedJanuary 29, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 67 A.D.2d 734 (People v. Carrera) 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. Carrera, 67 A.D.2d 734, 412 N.Y.S.2d 586, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10365 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County, imposed May 3, 1978, upon his conviction of grand larceny in the third degree, on his plea of guilty, the sentence being an indeterminate prison term with a maximum of three years. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing it to a five-year period of probation and case remanded to Criminal Term (1) for the imposition of such conditions as the court, in its discretion, deems "reasonably necessary” (Penal Law, § 65.10), said conditions to include the requirement that the defendant remain at Daytop Village until he successfully completes its program and (2) for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). The sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Rabin, J. P., Gulotta, Shapiro and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County, imposed May 3, 1978, upon his conviction of grand larceny in the third degree, on his plea of guilty, the sentence being an indeterminate prison term with a maximum of three years. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing it to a five-year period of probation and case remanded to Criminal Term (1) for the imposition of such conditions as the court, in its discretion, deems "reasonably necessary” (Penal Law, § 65.10), said conditions to include the requirement that the defendant remain at Daytop Village until he successfully completes its program and (2) for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). The sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Rabin, J. P., Gulotta, Shapiro and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 A.D.2d 734, 412 N.Y.S.2d 586, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-carrera-nyappdiv-1979.