People v. Foley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Foley

106 A.D.2d 517, 483 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21558

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

DecidedDecember 17, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 106 A.D.2d 517 (People v. Foley) 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. Foley, 106 A.D.2d 517, 483 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21558 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bonomo, J.), imposed November 23, 1983, which, upon an order of this court that he be resentenced as a second felony offender upon his convictions of rape in the first degree and assault in the second degree (People v Foley, 96 AD2d 866), resentenced him as a second felony offender to concurrent indeterminate years of imprisonment of 12½ to 25 years and 3½ to 7 years.

Resentence affirmed.

We find no merit to defendant’s contention that the provisions for mandatory enhanced prison sentences for second felony offenders established in article 70 of the Penal Law are unconstitutional (see People v Morse, 62 NY2d 205; People v Thompson, 105 AD2d 762; People v Cates, 104 AD2d 895; People v Kepple, 9& AD2d 783). Nor, under the circumstances, do we find that the sentences imposed were unduly harsh or excessive. O’Connor, J. P., Brown, Lawrence and Fiber, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bonomo, J.), imposed November 23, 1983, which, upon an order of this court that he be resentenced as a second felony offender upon his convictions of rape in the first degree and assault in the second degree (People v Foley, 96 AD2d 866), resentenced him as a second felony offender to concurrent indeterminate years of imprisonment of 12½ to 25 years and 3½ to 7 years.

Resentence affirmed.

We find no merit to defendant’s contention that the provisions for mandatory enhanced prison sentences for second felony offenders established in article 70 of the Penal Law are unconstitutional (see People v Morse, 62 NY2d 205; People v Thompson, 105 AD2d 762; People v Cates, 104 AD2d 895; People v Kepple, 9& AD2d 783). Nor, under the circumstances, do we find that the sentences imposed were unduly harsh or excessive. O’Connor, J. P., Brown, Lawrence and Fiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 A.D.2d 517, 483 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-foley-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack