People v. David

New York Court of Appeals

People v. David

65 N.Y. 809

DecidedJune 28, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 65 N.Y. 809 (People v. David) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. David, 65 N.Y. 809 (N.Y. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The sentencing court exceeded its power in sentencing the defendant to lifetime probation because the prerequisites mandated by the Legislature were not met (Penal Law § 65.00 [1] [b]). Hence, the sentence was illegal and therefore reviewable despite the District Attorney’s failure to object (see, People v [811]*811Fuller, 57 NY2d 152, 156-157, n 3; People v Drummond, 40 NY2d 990, 992, cert denied sub nom. New York v Luis J., 431 US 908).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Boomer

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The sentencing court exceeded its power in sentencing the defendant to lifetime probation because the prerequisites mandated by the Legislature were not met (Penal Law § 65.00 [1] [b]). Hence, the sentence was illegal and therefore reviewable despite the District Attorney’s failure to object (see, People v [811]*811Fuller, 57 NY2d 152, 156-157, n 3; People v Drummond, 40 NY2d 990, 992, cert denied sub nom. New York v Luis J., 431 US 908).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Boomer

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 N.Y. 809, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-david-ny-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack