People v. Dicker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dicker

29 A.D.2d 972, 289 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4249

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

DecidedApril 15, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 972 (People v. Dicker) 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. Dicker, 29 A.D.2d 972, 289 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4249 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Cross appeals from an order of the County Court, Westchester County, dated September 7, 1967, which granted the People’s motion for reargument, but adhered to the original decision of February 27, 1967, and granted defendant’s motion (for resentence upon [973]*973an original sentence rendered January 28, 1965) to the extent of remanding him to the Supreme Court in Kings County for resentenee upon an original sentence rendered November 16, 1928. The People’s brief excepts from its appeal so much of the order as granted reargument. Upon the People’s appeal, order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law; in accordance, the second decretal paragraph of the order is struck out and defendant’s motion is denied. The findings of fact below are affirmed. Defendant’s appeal dismissed. ' An order denying a motion for resentenee is not appealable (People v. Taranow, 28 A D 2d 562). We have, however, considered the merits and would deny relief to defendant in any event. The proceedings for a resentenee on the 1928 judgment have been completed in Kings County. Defendant does not show a violation of a constitutional right that would warrant a resentenee pursuant to section 1943 of the Penal Law. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Cross appeals from an order of the County Court, Westchester County, dated September 7, 1967, which granted the People’s motion for reargument, but adhered to the original decision of February 27, 1967, and granted defendant’s motion (for resentence upon [973]*973an original sentence rendered January 28, 1965) to the extent of remanding him to the Supreme Court in Kings County for resentenee upon an original sentence rendered November 16, 1928. The People’s brief excepts from its appeal so much of the order as granted reargument. Upon the People’s appeal, order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law; in accordance, the second decretal paragraph of the order is struck out and defendant’s motion is denied. The findings of fact below are affirmed. Defendant’s appeal dismissed. ' An order denying a motion for resentenee is not appealable (People v. Taranow, 28 A D 2d 562). We have, however, considered the merits and would deny relief to defendant in any event. The proceedings for a resentenee on the 1928 judgment have been completed in Kings County. Defendant does not show a violation of a constitutional right that would warrant a resentenee pursuant to section 1943 of the Penal Law. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 972, 289 N.Y.S.2d 446, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dicker-nyappdiv-1968.