People v. Curio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Curio

159 A.D.2d 513

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

DecidedMarch 5, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 159 A.D.2d 513 (People v. Curio) 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. Curio, 159 A.D.2d 513 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), rendered July 26, 1988, convicting him of kidnapping in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence of 7 Vi to 15 years’ imprisonment.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

We find unpersuasive the defendant’s contention that his sentence is unduly harsh and excessive so as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The defendant’s lengthy criminal record, his unwillingness to rehabilitate himself, and the serious nature of the instant offense, support the conclusion that the challenged sentence is appropriate. The defendant has failed to present any circumstances warranting a reduction in sentence, and his claim of cruel and unusual punishment is factually and legally unavailing. Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Sullivan, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), rendered July 26, 1988, convicting him of kidnapping in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence of 7 Vi to 15 years’ imprisonment.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

We find unpersuasive the defendant’s contention that his sentence is unduly harsh and excessive so as to constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The defendant’s lengthy criminal record, his unwillingness to rehabilitate himself, and the serious nature of the instant offense, support the conclusion that the challenged sentence is appropriate. The defendant has failed to present any circumstances warranting a reduction in sentence, and his claim of cruel and unusual punishment is factually and legally unavailing. Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Sullivan, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 A.D.2d 513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-curio-nyappdiv-1990.