People v. Cole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cole

261 A.D.2d 483, 688 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4749

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

DecidedMay 10, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D.2d 483 (People v. Cole) 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. Cole, 261 A.D.2d 483, 688 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4749 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.), both rendered June 26, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under Indictment No. 13260/91 and criminal facilitation in the fourth degree under Indictment No. 10300/91, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered June 26, 1998, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court under Indictment No. 12923/88, upon a finding that he violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

Ordered that the judgments and amended judgment are affirmed.

The Supreme Court properly rejected the defendant’s claim, pursuant to CPL 380.30 (1), that it had lost jurisdiction to sentence him because the sentencing was unreasonably delayed (see, CPL 380.30 [1]; see also, People v Drake, 61 NY2d 359, 366; People v Headley, 134 AD2d 519, 520). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.), both rendered June 26, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree under Indictment No. 13260/91 and criminal facilitation in the fourth degree under Indictment No. 10300/91, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered June 26, 1998, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court under Indictment No. 12923/88, upon a finding that he violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

Ordered that the judgments and amended judgment are affirmed.

The Supreme Court properly rejected the defendant’s claim, pursuant to CPL 380.30 (1), that it had lost jurisdiction to sentence him because the sentencing was unreasonably delayed (see, CPL 380.30 [1]; see also, People v Drake, 61 NY2d 359, 366; People v Headley, 134 AD2d 519, 520). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 483, 688 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4749, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cole-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack