People v. Hampton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hampton

126 A.D.2d 744, 511 N.Y.S.2d 328, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41895

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 126 A.D.2d 744 (People v. Hampton) 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. Hampton, 126 A.D.2d 744, 511 N.Y.S.2d 328, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41895 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Lawrence, J.), rendered March 14, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The People clearly established a prima facie case of robbery in the first degree against the defendant. The trial court therefore properly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss, [745]*745inter alia, that count of the indictment (see, CPL 290.10 [1]). Further, the court’s pretrial Sandoval ruling, permitting the prosecutor to cross-examine the defendant with respect to a prior robbery charge resulting in his conviction of attempted robbery in the second degree, did not constitute an abuse of discretion, particularly inasmuch as the court precluded inquiry as to a number of other prior robbery and burglary charges against the defendant (see, People v Gonzalez, 111 AD2d 870, revd on other grounds 68 NY2d 424). Finally, we perceive no basis to disturb the determination of the court, inter alia, sentencing the defendant as a second violent felony offender, to 12 Vi to 25 years’ imprisonment for the conviction of robbery in the first degree.

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Fiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Lawrence, J.), rendered March 14, 1984, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The People clearly established a prima facie case of robbery in the first degree against the defendant. The trial court therefore properly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss, [745]*745inter alia, that count of the indictment (see, CPL 290.10 [1]). Further, the court’s pretrial Sandoval ruling, permitting the prosecutor to cross-examine the defendant with respect to a prior robbery charge resulting in his conviction of attempted robbery in the second degree, did not constitute an abuse of discretion, particularly inasmuch as the court precluded inquiry as to a number of other prior robbery and burglary charges against the defendant (see, People v Gonzalez, 111 AD2d 870, revd on other grounds 68 NY2d 424). Finally, we perceive no basis to disturb the determination of the court, inter alia, sentencing the defendant as a second violent felony offender, to 12 Vi to 25 years’ imprisonment for the conviction of robbery in the first degree.

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Fiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D.2d 744, 511 N.Y.S.2d 328, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hampton-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack