People v. Hudson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hudson

2 A.D.3d 230, 768 N.Y.S.2d 466, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13219

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

DecidedDecember 11, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 2 A.D.3d 230 (People v. Hudson) 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. Hudson, 2 A.D.3d 230, 768 N.Y.S.2d 466, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13219 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Solomon, J.), rendered January 28, 2003, convicting defendant, on her plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in the first degree, and sentencing her to a term of SVa years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied youthful offender treatment. Since defendant was convicted of an armed felony, she was not eligible for youthful offender treatment in the absence of mitigating circumstances that “bear directly upon the manner in which the crime was committed” (CPL 720.10 [2] [a]; [3] [i]). The record does not establish such mitigating circumstances, and, given the circumstances of the crime, youthful offender treatment was not warranted in any event. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Williams and Lerner, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Solomon, J.), rendered January 28, 2003, convicting defendant, on her plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in the first degree, and sentencing her to a term of SVa years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied youthful offender treatment. Since defendant was convicted of an armed felony, she was not eligible for youthful offender treatment in the absence of mitigating circumstances that “bear directly upon the manner in which the crime was committed” (CPL 720.10 [2] [a]; [3] [i]). The record does not establish such mitigating circumstances, and, given the circumstances of the crime, youthful offender treatment was not warranted in any event. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Williams and Lerner, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 A.D.3d 230, 768 N.Y.S.2d 466, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hudson-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack