People v. Irrizarry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Irrizarry

277 A.D.2d 153, 716 N.Y.S.2d 303, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12411

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

DecidedNovember 28, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 277 A.D.2d 153 (People v. Irrizarry) 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. Irrizarry, 277 A.D.2d 153, 716 N.Y.S.2d 303, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12411 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Stackhouse, J.), rendered March 10, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 7V2 to 15 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to reduce the sentence to a term of 5 to 10 years, and otherwise affirmed.

Evidence concerning an uncharged contemporaneous sale was properly admitted since it completed the narrative of events, was relevant to the contested issue of identity, and was not unduly prejudicial (People v Pressley, 216 AD2d 202, lv denied 86 NY2d 800). However, we find the sentence imposed excessive to the extent indicated.

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Lerner and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Stackhouse, J.), rendered March 10, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 7V2 to 15 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to reduce the sentence to a term of 5 to 10 years, and otherwise affirmed.

Evidence concerning an uncharged contemporaneous sale was properly admitted since it completed the narrative of events, was relevant to the contested issue of identity, and was not unduly prejudicial (People v Pressley, 216 AD2d 202, lv denied 86 NY2d 800). However, we find the sentence imposed excessive to the extent indicated.

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Lerner and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

277 A.D.2d 153, 716 N.Y.S.2d 303, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-irrizarry-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack