People v. Hall

57 A.D.3d 1471, 869 N.Y.2d 834
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Hall. Read the opinion of the Court — 35 A.D.3d 1171

Opinion

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of rape in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.35 [2]), defendant contends that the presentence report should be amended because, according to defendant, it contains inaccurate assertions and unsupported speculation that “are likely to prejudice [defendant] for years to come” (see generally People v Harrington, 3 AD3d 737, 739 [2004]). Defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review, and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present — Centra, J.E, Peradotto, Green and Pine, JJ.

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

People v. Hall, 57 A.D.3d 1471, 869 N.Y.2d 834 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

57 A.D.3d 1471 (People v. Hall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Harrington
3 A.D.3d 737 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)