People v. Chambliss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Chambliss

60 A.D.2d 584, 399 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14531

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

DecidedDecember 5, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 60 A.D.2d 584 (People v. Chambliss) 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. Chambliss, 60 A.D.2d 584, 399 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14531 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered November 1, 1976, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a plea of guilty, and imposing an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment with a maximum of 10 years. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentence to an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of five years. As so modified, judgment affirmed and case remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). Under the circumstances of this case, the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive to the extent indicated herein. We have considered the other issues raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered November 1, 1976, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a plea of guilty, and imposing an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment with a maximum of 10 years. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentence to an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of five years. As so modified, judgment affirmed and case remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). Under the circumstances of this case, the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive to the extent indicated herein. We have considered the other issues raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.2d 584, 399 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-chambliss-nyappdiv-1977.