People v. Frankel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Frankel

240 A.D.2d 431, 658 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5735

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

DecidedJune 2, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 240 A.D.2d 431 (People v. Frankel) 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. Frankel, 240 A.D.2d 431, 658 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5735 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from two amended judgments of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), both rendered September 8,1993, revoking two sentences of probation previously imposed by the same court, both rendered April 26, 1988, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing sentences of imprisonment upon his previous convictions of grand larceny in the second degree (two counts), offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (twelve counts), forgery in the second degree (four counts), and falsifying business records in the first degree (six counts), under Indictment No. 87-00152, and filing a false tax return under Indictment No. 87-00157.

Ordered that the amended judgments are affirmed.

The People established that the defendant violated a condition of his probation by failing to make restitution (see, CPL 410.70 [3]; People v Minard, 161 AD2d 607; cf., CPL 420.10 [5]). The County Court therefore properly revoked the sentences of probation (see, People v Holmes, 226 AD2d 1122; People v Ray, 105 AD2d 988).

The sentences imposed were not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit (see, CPL 65.10 [2] [g]; cf., People v DeFrancesco, 136 AD2d 560). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from two amended judgments of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), both rendered September 8,1993, revoking two sentences of probation previously imposed by the same court, both rendered April 26, 1988, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing sentences of imprisonment upon his previous convictions of grand larceny in the second degree (two counts), offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree (twelve counts), forgery in the second degree (four counts), and falsifying business records in the first degree (six counts), under Indictment No. 87-00152, and filing a false tax return under Indictment No. 87-00157.

Ordered that the amended judgments are affirmed.

The People established that the defendant violated a condition of his probation by failing to make restitution (see, CPL 410.70 [3]; People v Minard, 161 AD2d 607; cf., CPL 420.10 [5]). The County Court therefore properly revoked the sentences of probation (see, People v Holmes, 226 AD2d 1122; People v Ray, 105 AD2d 988).

The sentences imposed were not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit (see, CPL 65.10 [2] [g]; cf., People v DeFrancesco, 136 AD2d 560). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D.2d 431, 658 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5735, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-frankel-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack