People v. Christie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Christie

236 A.D.2d 482, 654 N.Y.S.2d 597, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1197

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

DecidedFebruary 10, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 236 A.D.2d 482 (People v. Christie) 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. Christie, 236 A.D.2d 482, 654 N.Y.S.2d 597, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1197 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered October 12, 1995, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of vehicular assault in the second degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant does not contend that there was any error in the violation of probation proceeding which resulted in the amended judgment. The defendant, however, alleges error in his original allocution and sentence in the underlying judgment. That proceeding is not properly before this Court on the appeal from the amended judgment (see, People v Serrano, 203 AD2d 395; People v Heckstall, 65 AD2d 581). Miller, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered October 12, 1995, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of vehicular assault in the second degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant does not contend that there was any error in the violation of probation proceeding which resulted in the amended judgment. The defendant, however, alleges error in his original allocution and sentence in the underlying judgment. That proceeding is not properly before this Court on the appeal from the amended judgment (see, People v Serrano, 203 AD2d 395; People v Heckstall, 65 AD2d 581). Miller, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 482, 654 N.Y.S.2d 597, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-christie-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack