People v. Cheatham

278 A.D.2d 889, 718 N.Y.S.2d 913, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13421
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 27, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 278 A.D.2d 889 (People v. Cheatham) 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. Cheatham, 278 A.D.2d 889, 718 N.Y.S.2d 913, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13421 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that Supreme Court failed to exercise its discretion in resentencing him following a violation of probation. Although defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal does not encompass defendant’s resentencing following a violation of probation (see, People v Rodriguez, 259 AD2d 1040), we conclude that the court did not fail to exercise its discretion in resentencing defendant (see, People v Wright, 239 AD2d 945; cf., People v Nicholson, 237 AD2d 973, lv denied 90 NY2d 908). Furthermore, the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Tills, J. — Violation of Probation.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hurlbutt, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Rowland
11 A.D.3d 825 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
278 A.D.2d 889, 718 N.Y.S.2d 913, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cheatham-nyappdiv-2000.