People v. Dulac

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dulac

209 A.D.2d 1045, 619 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12146

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 16, 1994·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Case held, decision [1046]*1046reserved and matter remitted to Niagara County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: The People candidly concede that, because the record does not establish whether defendant was present at a Sandoval conference, the case must be remitted to Niagara County Court for a reconstruction hearing to expand the record and to determine whether defendant was present (see, People v Michalek, 82 NY2d 906; People v James, 207 AD2d 1028; People v Mitchell, 189 AD2d 337). (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Hannigan, J.—Sodomy, 1st Degree.) Present—Pine, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

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

Case held, decision [1046]*1046reserved and matter remitted to Niagara County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: The People candidly concede that, because the record does not establish whether defendant was present at a Sandoval conference, the case must be remitted to Niagara County Court for a reconstruction hearing to expand the record and to determine whether defendant was present (see, People v Michalek, 82 NY2d 906; People v James, 207 AD2d 1028; People v Mitchell, 189 AD2d 337). (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Hannigan, J.—Sodomy, 1st Degree.) Present—Pine, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

People v. Dulac, 209 A.D.2d 1045, 619 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12146 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

209 A.D.2d 1045 (People v. Dulac) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related