People v. Linscott

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Linscott

255 A.D.2d 1007, 679 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12317

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D.2d 1007 (People v. Linscott) 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. Linscott, 255 A.D.2d 1007, 679 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12317 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed and matter remitted to Jefferson County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Defendant argues and the People concede that the record before [1008]*1008County Court does not contain sufficient evidence to support the amount of restitution ordered (cf, People v Kim, 91 NY2d 407, 411; see generally, People v Consalvo, 89 NY2d 140, 144-146). Consequently, we modify the judgment by vacating the amount of restitution, and we remit the matter to Jefferson County Court to determine the actual amount of the victim’s out-of-pocket loss (see, People v Lynch, — AD2d — [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Judgment of Jefferson County Court, Clary, J. — Attempted Criminal Mischief, 2nd Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed and matter remitted to Jefferson County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Defendant argues and the People concede that the record before [1008]*1008County Court does not contain sufficient evidence to support the amount of restitution ordered (cf, People v Kim, 91 NY2d 407, 411; see generally, People v Consalvo, 89 NY2d 140, 144-146). Consequently, we modify the judgment by vacating the amount of restitution, and we remit the matter to Jefferson County Court to determine the actual amount of the victim’s out-of-pocket loss (see, People v Lynch, — AD2d — [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Judgment of Jefferson County Court, Clary, J. — Attempted Criminal Mischief, 2nd Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D.2d 1007, 679 N.Y.S.2d 865, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-linscott-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack