People v. Hyde

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hyde

110 A.D.2d 716, 488 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48615

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

DecidedApril 8, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 110 A.D.2d 716 (People v. Hyde) 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. Hyde, 110 A.D.2d 716, 488 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48615 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, as it must be at this stage (People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, cert denied _ US _, 105 S Ct 327), it is plain that the evidence adduced at trial established that defendant was guilty of the charges of which he was convicted.

The sentence of 25 years to life imposed for felony murder was not an abuse of discretion by the sentencing Judge, and the facts of this case do not warrant our substituting our discretion for that of the sentencing Judge (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Gibbons, J. P., Weinstein, Brown and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

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

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, as it must be at this stage (People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, cert denied _ US _, 105 S Ct 327), it is plain that the evidence adduced at trial established that defendant was guilty of the charges of which he was convicted.

The sentence of 25 years to life imposed for felony murder was not an abuse of discretion by the sentencing Judge, and the facts of this case do not warrant our substituting our discretion for that of the sentencing Judge (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Gibbons, J. P., Weinstein, Brown and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 A.D.2d 716, 488 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hyde-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack