People v. Kubasiak

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kubasiak

156 A.D.2d 932, 550 N.Y.S.2d 861, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16075

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1989

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 156 A.D.2d 932 (People v. Kubasiak) 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. Kubasiak, 156 A.D.2d 932, 550 N.Y.S.2d 861, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16075 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The court properly sentenced defendant as a second felony offender without conducting an evidentiary hearing because defendant failed to allege facts in support of his statement that his predicate felony conviction was unconstitutionally obtained (see, People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 15; see also, CPL 400.21 [7] [b]; People v Gipson, 152 AD2d 941). Moreover, the court properly questioned defendant regarding his claim and concluded that he had failed to sustain his burden of proof on the issue (see, People v Harris, supra, at 15, 16; People v Stewart, 96 AD2d 622, 623). Defendant’s contention that the trial court abused its discretion in its Sandoval (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371) ruling and thereby deprived him of a fair trial lacks merit (see, People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292; People v Bennette, 56 NY2d 142; People v Shields, 46 NY2d 764). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme [933]*933Court, Erie County, Flynn, J. — burglary, third degree.) Present —Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The court properly sentenced defendant as a second felony offender without conducting an evidentiary hearing because defendant failed to allege facts in support of his statement that his predicate felony conviction was unconstitutionally obtained (see, People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 15; see also, CPL 400.21 [7] [b]; People v Gipson, 152 AD2d 941). Moreover, the court properly questioned defendant regarding his claim and concluded that he had failed to sustain his burden of proof on the issue (see, People v Harris, supra, at 15, 16; People v Stewart, 96 AD2d 622, 623). Defendant’s contention that the trial court abused its discretion in its Sandoval (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371) ruling and thereby deprived him of a fair trial lacks merit (see, People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292; People v Bennette, 56 NY2d 142; People v Shields, 46 NY2d 764). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme [933]*933Court, Erie County, Flynn, J. — burglary, third degree.) Present —Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Balio and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 A.D.2d 932, 550 N.Y.S.2d 861, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16075, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kubasiak-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack