People v. Conger

233 A.D.2d 620, 650 N.Y.S.2d 319, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11737
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 14, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 233 A.D.2d 620 (People v. Conger) 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. Conger, 233 A.D.2d 620, 650 N.Y.S.2d 319, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11737 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Cortland County (Mullen, J.), rendered November 18,1993, which revoked defendant’s probation and imposed a term of imprisonment.

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to the crimes of assault in the second degree and two counts of petit larceny. He was sentenced to a five-year term of probation on the assault conviction to run concurrently with two three-year terms of probation imposed on the petit larceny [621]*621convictions. Defendant was thereafter charged with violating the terms of his probation due to, inter alia, his failure to complete a residential drug rehabilitation program. He was accordingly sentenced to a prison term of l1/s to 7 years.

Defendant appeals, contending that County Court erred by failing to order an updated presentence report and that the sentence imposed was excessive. We disagree. Whether to obtain an updated presentence report prior to resentencing lies within the discretion of the sentencing court (see, People v Kuey, 83 NY2d 278, 282). County Court did not abuse its discretion here where the original presentence report was less than six months old and was supplemented by more recent reports from defendant’s probation officer and from the residential drug rehabilitation program which defendant left after only 30 minutes. Given defendant’s failure to abide by the conditions of his probation, we find no reason to disturb the sentence imposed by County Court.

Mikoll, J. P., White, Casey, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

People v. Defayette
241 A.D.2d 761 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
233 A.D.2d 620, 650 N.Y.S.2d 319, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-conger-nyappdiv-1996.