People v. Golley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Golley

195 A.D.2d 713, 601 N.Y.S.2d 871, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7093

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 8, 1993·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Madison County (O’Brien, III, J.), rendered March 5, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

Defendant contends on this appeal that Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 (2) is unconstitutionally vague and that the portion of the sentence imposing a one-year jail term is harsh and excessive. We reject defendant’s argument that the statute is unconstitutionally vague (see, People v Mascolo, 175 AD2d 812; People v Perez, 73 AD2d 677). As to the incarceration portion of the sentence imposed, we find this issue to be moot because the maximum term of defendant’s sentence has apparently expired (see, People v Millard, 155 AD2d 820). In any event, were we to consider this issue, we would not disturb the sentence imposed by County Court (see, People v Miller, 163 AD2d 627, 629, lv denied 76 NY2d 942).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Levine and Crew III, 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 Madison County (O’Brien, III, J.), rendered March 5, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

Defendant contends on this appeal that Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 (2) is unconstitutionally vague and that the portion of the sentence imposing a one-year jail term is harsh and excessive. We reject defendant’s argument that the statute is unconstitutionally vague (see, People v Mascolo, 175 AD2d 812; People v Perez, 73 AD2d 677). As to the incarceration portion of the sentence imposed, we find this issue to be moot because the maximum term of defendant’s sentence has apparently expired (see, People v Millard, 155 AD2d 820). In any event, were we to consider this issue, we would not disturb the sentence imposed by County Court (see, People v Miller, 163 AD2d 627, 629, lv denied 76 NY2d 942).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Levine and Crew III, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

People v. Golley, 195 A.D.2d 713, 601 N.Y.S.2d 871, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7093 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

195 A.D.2d 713 (People v. Golley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related