People v. Garnavos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Garnavos

47 A.D.2d 907, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9329

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

DecidedApril 7, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.D.2d 907 (People v. Garnavos) 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. Garnavos, 47 A.D.2d 907, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9329 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals by defendants, as limited by their briefs, from two sentences (one as to each defendant) of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both imposed January 26, 1973, upon their convictions of robbery in the third degree upon their guilty pleas. Sentences reversed, on the law, and cases remanded to Criminal Term for resentence. The sentences imposed were not excessive. CPL 380.50 requires, however, that the sentencing court ask the defendant whether he wishes to make a statement before sentence is imposed (People v Cummings, 45 AD2d 763; People v Brown, 41 AD2d 850). No opportunity was offered, in the alternative or otherwise, from which it can be gleaned whether there was "substantial compliance with the statutory requirement” (People v McClain, 35 NY2d 483, 488). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

Appeals by defendants, as limited by their briefs, from two sentences (one as to each defendant) of the Supreme Court, Queens County, both imposed January 26, 1973, upon their convictions of robbery in the third degree upon their guilty pleas. Sentences reversed, on the law, and cases remanded to Criminal Term for resentence. The sentences imposed were not excessive. CPL 380.50 requires, however, that the sentencing court ask the defendant whether he wishes to make a statement before sentence is imposed (People v Cummings, 45 AD2d 763; People v Brown, 41 AD2d 850). No opportunity was offered, in the alternative or otherwise, from which it can be gleaned whether there was "substantial compliance with the statutory requirement” (People v McClain, 35 NY2d 483, 488). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.2d 907, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-garnavos-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack