People v. Del Valle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Del Valle

91 A.D.2d 513, 456 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19323

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

DecidedDecember 7, 1982

StatusPublished

This text of 91 A.D.2d 513 (People v. Del Valle) 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. Del Valle, 91 A.D.2d 513, 456 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19323 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Denzer, J.), rendered January 16, 1981, resentencing defendant on the count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the sentences theretofore imposed for the crimes of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and, except as so modified, affirmed. Defendant was indicted in a three-count indictment which charged him with acting in concert in the criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fifth degrees. In the court’s charge to the jury, it withdrew from their consideration the two possession counts. Defendant was found guilty of the sale count. Through some inadvertence, defendant, at the time of sentencing, was sentenced to concurrent terms on all three counts. [514]*514Somewhat more than five years later he was resentenced on the sale count. Nothing was said about the possession counts. As we read the record, the sentences imposed on the possession counts still remain in effect. Since defendant was never found guilty of those counts we vacate the sentences imposed therefor. We have examined the other issues raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Concur — Ross, J. P., Carro, Bloom and Kassal, JJ.

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

— Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Denzer, J.), rendered January 16, 1981, resentencing defendant on the count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the sentences theretofore imposed for the crimes of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and, except as so modified, affirmed. Defendant was indicted in a three-count indictment which charged him with acting in concert in the criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fifth degrees. In the court’s charge to the jury, it withdrew from their consideration the two possession counts. Defendant was found guilty of the sale count. Through some inadvertence, defendant, at the time of sentencing, was sentenced to concurrent terms on all three counts. [514]*514Somewhat more than five years later he was resentenced on the sale count. Nothing was said about the possession counts. As we read the record, the sentences imposed on the possession counts still remain in effect. Since defendant was never found guilty of those counts we vacate the sentences imposed therefor. We have examined the other issues raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. Concur — Ross, J. P., Carro, Bloom and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 A.D.2d 513, 456 N.Y.S.2d 383, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-del-valle-nyappdiv-1982.