People v. Lisamarie F.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lisamarie F.

115 A.D.2d 614, 496 N.Y.S.2d 474, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55042

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

DecidedDecember 16, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 115 A.D.2d 614 (People v. Lisamarie F.) 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. Lisamarie F., 115 A.D.2d 614, 496 N.Y.S.2d 474, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55042 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered September 20, 1984, which, after a hear[615]*615ing, revoked her sentence of probation and sentenced her, as a youthful offender, to six months’ imprisonment.

Amended judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by vacating the sentence imposed thereon. As so modified, amended judgment affirmed and matter remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for resentencing in accordance herewith.

The sentencing court should have secured an updated presentence report before resentencing defendant (see, People v Jackson, 106 AD2d 93; People v Hayes, 101 AD2d 893; People v Cruz, 89 AD2d 569). Accordingly, a remittance for the purpose of obtaining an updated presentence report and for resentencing is necessary. We have considered defendants other contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered September 20, 1984, which, after a hear[615]*615ing, revoked her sentence of probation and sentenced her, as a youthful offender, to six months’ imprisonment.

Amended judgment modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by vacating the sentence imposed thereon. As so modified, amended judgment affirmed and matter remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for resentencing in accordance herewith.

The sentencing court should have secured an updated presentence report before resentencing defendant (see, People v Jackson, 106 AD2d 93; People v Hayes, 101 AD2d 893; People v Cruz, 89 AD2d 569). Accordingly, a remittance for the purpose of obtaining an updated presentence report and for resentencing is necessary. We have considered defendants other contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 A.D.2d 614, 496 N.Y.S.2d 474, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55042, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lisamarie-f-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack