People v. Hanno

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hanno

197 A.D.2d 879, 604 N.Y.S.2d 874, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9285

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

DecidedOctober 1, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 197 A.D.2d 879 (People v. Hanno) 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. Hanno, 197 A.D.2d 879, 604 N.Y.S.2d 874, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9285 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s application for youthful offender status (see, People v Cruickshank, 105 AD2d 325, 333-334, affd sub nom. People v Dawn Maria C., 67 NY2d 625; see also, People v Henninger, 185 AD2d 714, lv denied 80 NY2d 930). Furthermore, we decline as a matter of discretion [880]*880in the interest of justice to vacate the conviction and adjudicate defendant a youthful offender (cf., People v Cruickshank, supra). We conclude that the sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Cayuga County Court, Corning, J.—Burglary, 3rd Degree.) Present— Callahan, J. P., Green, Fallon, Boomer and Davis, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s application for youthful offender status (see, People v Cruickshank, 105 AD2d 325, 333-334, affd sub nom. People v Dawn Maria C., 67 NY2d 625; see also, People v Henninger, 185 AD2d 714, lv denied 80 NY2d 930). Furthermore, we decline as a matter of discretion [880]*880in the interest of justice to vacate the conviction and adjudicate defendant a youthful offender (cf., People v Cruickshank, supra). We conclude that the sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Cayuga County Court, Corning, J.—Burglary, 3rd Degree.) Present— Callahan, J. P., Green, Fallon, Boomer and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 A.D.2d 879, 604 N.Y.S.2d 874, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hanno-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack