People v. Faulkner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Faulkner

279 A.D.2d 643, 718 N.Y.S.2d 894, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 66

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

DecidedJanuary 4, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 279 A.D.2d 643 (People v. Faulkner) 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. Faulkner, 279 A.D.2d 643, 718 N.Y.S.2d 894, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 66 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Buckley, J.), rendered April 6, 1998, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of driving while intoxicated and was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement to five years of probation, six months in County jail [644]*644and a $2,000 fine. Defendant’s sole argument on appeal is that his six-month jail sentence was harsh and excessive. We disagree. Moreover, inasmuch as defendant has since completed this jail term, the argument is moot (see, People v Karpinski, 233 AD2d 618; People v Christensen, 199 AD2d 649).

Mercure, J. P., Spain, Carpinello, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Buckley, J.), rendered April 6, 1998, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of driving while intoxicated and was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement to five years of probation, six months in County jail [644]*644and a $2,000 fine. Defendant’s sole argument on appeal is that his six-month jail sentence was harsh and excessive. We disagree. Moreover, inasmuch as defendant has since completed this jail term, the argument is moot (see, People v Karpinski, 233 AD2d 618; People v Christensen, 199 AD2d 649).

Mercure, J. P., Spain, Carpinello, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 A.D.2d 643, 718 N.Y.S.2d 894, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 66, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-faulkner-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack