People v. Hamdam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hamdam

95 A.D.3d 902, 942 N.Y.S.2d 880

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

DecidedMay 1, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 95 A.D.3d 902 (People v. Hamdam) 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. Hamdam, 95 A.D.3d 902, 942 N.Y.S.2d 880 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garnett, J.), imposed May 22, 2009, on the ground that the resentence was excessive.

[903]*903Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the resentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Mastro, A.P.J., Rivera, Eng, Leventhal and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garnett, J.), imposed May 22, 2009, on the ground that the resentence was excessive.

[903]*903Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the resentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Mastro, A.P.J., Rivera, Eng, Leventhal and Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

95 A.D.3d 902, 942 N.Y.S.2d 880, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hamdam-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack