People v. Dzielak

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Dzielak

56 A.D.2d 579, 390 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10622

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 56 A.D.2d 579 (People v. Dzielak) 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. Dzielak, 56 A.D.2d 579, 390 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10622 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered May 5, 1976, upon resentence, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree and assault in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing concurrent indeterminate sentences, each with a maximum of five years. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentences upon each of the convictions to concurrent indeterminate terms with a maximum of three years. As so modified, judgment affirmed. The sentences were excessive to the extent indicated herein. Latham, Acting P. J., Margett, Suozzi and Mollen, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered May 5, 1976, upon resentence, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree and assault in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing concurrent indeterminate sentences, each with a maximum of five years. Judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentences upon each of the convictions to concurrent indeterminate terms with a maximum of three years. As so modified, judgment affirmed. The sentences were excessive to the extent indicated herein. Latham, Acting P. J., Margett, Suozzi and Mollen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 A.D.2d 579, 390 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10622, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dzielak-nyappdiv-1977.