People v. Klein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Klein

73 A.D.2d 911, 423 N.Y.S.2d 851, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9821

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

DecidedJanuary 7, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 73 A.D.2d 911 (People v. Klein) 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. Klein, 73 A.D.2d 911, 423 N.Y.S.2d 851, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9821 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, rendered November 13, 1978, convicting him of willful violation of the health laws, upon his guilty plea, and imposing a sentence of a fine of $2,000 and ordering him to make restitution of $156.50 to the patient fund of Silver Lake Nursing Home. Judgment affirmed (see People vDeutsch, 71 AD2d 1029). We note that the defendant agreed, on the record, to "contribute” the sum of $156.50 to the patient fund at the nursing home in question. Therefore, the court’s use of the word "restitution” constituted a mere technical error which did not affect the defendant’s substantive rights (see CPL 470.50, subd 1). Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Titone and Mangano, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, rendered November 13, 1978, convicting him of willful violation of the health laws, upon his guilty plea, and imposing a sentence of a fine of $2,000 and ordering him to make restitution of $156.50 to the patient fund of Silver Lake Nursing Home. Judgment affirmed (see People vDeutsch, 71 AD2d 1029). We note that the defendant agreed, on the record, to "contribute” the sum of $156.50 to the patient fund at the nursing home in question. Therefore, the court’s use of the word "restitution” constituted a mere technical error which did not affect the defendant’s substantive rights (see CPL 470.50, subd 1). Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Titone and Mangano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 A.D.2d 911, 423 N.Y.S.2d 851, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-klein-nyappdiv-1980.