People v. Douglas

109 A.D.3d 484, 969 N.Y.S.2d 922

This text of 109 A.D.3d 484 (People v. Douglas) 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. Douglas, 109 A.D.3d 484, 969 N.Y.S.2d 922 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Suffolk County (J. Doyle, J.), imposed January 13, 2012, and an amended sentence of the same court imposed January 27, 2012, on the ground that the sentence and the amended sentence were excessive.

Ordered that the appeal from the sentence is dismissed, as that sentence was superseded by the amended sentence; and it is further,

Ordered that the amended sentence is affirmed.

Contrary to the People’s contention, the defendant’s claim that the amended sentence was excessive need not be preserved for appellate review. Our power to review a sentence as harsh or excessive stems not from our power to review questions of law (see CPL 470.15 [1]), but from our interest of justice jurisdiction (see NY Const, art VI, § 30; CPL 470.15 [3] [c]; [6] [b]; People v Andreu, 103 AD3d 661, 661 [2013]; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80, 85-86 [1982]). Nevertheless, the amended sentence was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Eng, PJ., Mastro, Dickerson, Lott and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
People v. Andreu
103 A.D.3d 661 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
109 A.D.3d 484, 969 N.Y.S.2d 922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-douglas-nyappdiv-2013.