People v. Hamilton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hamilton

214 A.D.2d 783, 624 N.Y.S.2d 982, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3706

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 6, 1995·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Cardona, P. J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Tompkins County (Sherman, J.), rendered March 18, 1994, which revoked defendant’s probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

On May 1, 1992, defendant was convicted of insurance fraud in the fourth degree and sentenced to a five-year term of probation. Following a hearing, defendant was found to have violated the restitution condition of his probation and was resentenced to an eight-month term of imprisonment. Defendant appeals. Inasmuch as defendant has completed the sentence imposed, his appeal has been rendered moot. Dismissal is appropriate because "defendant’s appeal does not present a recurring issue of public interest which would otherwise escape appellate review” (People v Anderson, 197 AD2d 749, 750, lv denied 82 NY2d 921). In any event, were we not to dismiss the appeal as moot, we would affirm because we find that his contentions lack merit.

Mikoll, Crew III, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot.

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

Cardona, P. J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Tompkins County (Sherman, J.), rendered March 18, 1994, which revoked defendant’s probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

On May 1, 1992, defendant was convicted of insurance fraud in the fourth degree and sentenced to a five-year term of probation. Following a hearing, defendant was found to have violated the restitution condition of his probation and was resentenced to an eight-month term of imprisonment. Defendant appeals. Inasmuch as defendant has completed the sentence imposed, his appeal has been rendered moot. Dismissal is appropriate because "defendant’s appeal does not present a recurring issue of public interest which would otherwise escape appellate review” (People v Anderson, 197 AD2d 749, 750, lv denied 82 NY2d 921). In any event, were we not to dismiss the appeal as moot, we would affirm because we find that his contentions lack merit.

Mikoll, Crew III, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot.

People v. Hamilton, 214 A.D.2d 783, 624 N.Y.S.2d 982, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3706 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

214 A.D.2d 783 (People v. Hamilton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related