People v. Hicks

51 A.D.2d 751, 379 N.Y.S.2d 457, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11291
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 9, 1976
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 51 A.D.2d 751 (People v. Hicks) 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. Hicks, 51 A.D.2d 751, 379 N.Y.S.2d 457, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11291 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered January 17, 1975, convicting her of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, as a felony, in violation of subdivision 2 of section 1192 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law, and of operating a motor vehicle while impaired by the consumption of alcohol, in violation of subdivision 1 of section 1192 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing her on the first charge to a five-year period of probation, a fine of $250 or 60 days in jail, and revocation of her license, and, on the second charge, to an unconditional discharge. Judgment modified, on the law, by vacating the sentence imposed upon the conviction for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, as a felony, and case remanded to the County Court for resentencing upon the aforesaid conviction in accordance herewith and for further proceedings in accordance with CPL 460.50 (subd 5). As so modified, judgment affirmed. The facts have been considered and are determined to have been established. A proper sentence upon a conviction for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, as a felony, must be imposed under sections 55.10, 60.01 and 70.00 of the Penal Law and not under the Vehicle and Traffic Law (see People v Messinger, 35 NY2d 987, affg 43 AD2d 15). Thus, the sentence imposed upon that conviction herein, which included a fine and probation, was invalid as a matter of law. We find no fault with the revocation of defendant’s driver’s license (see Penal Law, § 60.30). Further, the sentence of an unconditional discharge imposed on the second charge, was proper. Latham, Acting P. J., Hargett, Damiani, Christ and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Arteca (Meagan)
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023
People v. Scafe (Naheem)
77 Misc. 3d 138(A) (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Murph
53 A.D.2d 702 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 A.D.2d 751, 379 N.Y.S.2d 457, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hicks-nyappdiv-1976.