People v. Cummings

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cummings

45 A.D.2d 763, 357 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4655

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

DecidedJune 24, 1974

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 45 A.D.2d 763 (People v. Cummings) 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. Cummings, 45 A.D.2d 763, 357 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4655 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County, imposed November 16, 1972 upon a conviction of attempted criminal possession of a dangerous drug in the fourth degree, upon a guilty plea. The sentence was an indeterminate prison term of not more than four years. Sentence reversed, on the law, and ease remanded to the Criminal Term for resentence in accordance with the views herein set forth. CPL 380.50 requires that the court not only make a statement at the time of sentence, but that the court ask the defendant whether he wishes to make a statement. This must be done (People v. Gilliam, 40 A D 2d 1036; People v. Brown, 41 A D 2d 850). The statutory requirement is not satisfied by asking the defendant whether he has any legal reason why sentence should not be pronounced. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Christ, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County, imposed November 16, 1972 upon a conviction of attempted criminal possession of a dangerous drug in the fourth degree, upon a guilty plea. The sentence was an indeterminate prison term of not more than four years. Sentence reversed, on the law, and ease remanded to the Criminal Term for resentence in accordance with the views herein set forth. CPL 380.50 requires that the court not only make a statement at the time of sentence, but that the court ask the defendant whether he wishes to make a statement. This must be done (People v. Gilliam, 40 A D 2d 1036; People v. Brown, 41 A D 2d 850). The statutory requirement is not satisfied by asking the defendant whether he has any legal reason why sentence should not be pronounced. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Christ, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 A.D.2d 763, 357 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cummings-nyappdiv-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack