People v. Fobbs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fobbs

40 A.D.2d 551, 334 N.Y.S.2d 260, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3990

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

DecidedJuly 13, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.2d 551 (People v. Fobbs) 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. Fobbs, 40 A.D.2d 551, 334 N.Y.S.2d 260, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3990 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered May 18, 1971, convicting him of possession of a dangerous drug in the fifth degree, upon a plea of guilty, and sentencing [552]*552him to a prison term of a maximum of three years, to run concurrently with unexpired parole time. Judgment reversed as to the sentence, on the law, and case remanded to the Criminal Term for resentence in accordance with the views herein set forth. The record indicates that defendant was a drug addict entitled to examination and sentencing pursuant to sections 207 and 208 of the Mental Hygiene Law. The Criminal Term recognized his addiction, but did not give defendant the benefit of the treatment accorded by those provisions of the law, because the Narcotic Addiction Control Commission had refused to accept any addicts at the time, for lack of funds and facilities. For the reasons stated, in People v. Bennet (39 A D 2d 320), defendant is entitled to be considered eligible for all the alternatives provided by statute for sentencing. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Gulotta, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered May 18, 1971, convicting him of possession of a dangerous drug in the fifth degree, upon a plea of guilty, and sentencing [552]*552him to a prison term of a maximum of three years, to run concurrently with unexpired parole time. Judgment reversed as to the sentence, on the law, and case remanded to the Criminal Term for resentence in accordance with the views herein set forth. The record indicates that defendant was a drug addict entitled to examination and sentencing pursuant to sections 207 and 208 of the Mental Hygiene Law. The Criminal Term recognized his addiction, but did not give defendant the benefit of the treatment accorded by those provisions of the law, because the Narcotic Addiction Control Commission had refused to accept any addicts at the time, for lack of funds and facilities. For the reasons stated, in People v. Bennet (39 A D 2d 320), defendant is entitled to be considered eligible for all the alternatives provided by statute for sentencing. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Gulotta, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.2d 551, 334 N.Y.S.2d 260, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3990, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fobbs-nyappdiv-1972.