People v. Loizos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Loizos

184 A.D.2d 432, 585 N.Y.S.2d 403, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8549

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

DecidedJune 25, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 184 A.D.2d 432 (People v. Loizos) 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. Loizos, 184 A.D.2d 432, 585 N.Y.S.2d 403, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8549 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.), rendered September 13, 1990, convicting defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in the second degree and sentencing him to a prison term of 2 Vs to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

At the plea allocution, defendant admitted that he and two accomplices robbed a man at knife-point in Manhattan on October 26, 1989.

Under the circumstances, the sentence imposed by the trial court was not excessive. At the plea allocution, the trial court made clear, and defendant indicated his understanding, that if defendant were to be arrested again he would face a prison term. Only nine days after this plea agreement was reached, defendant was arrested in New Jersey for receiving stolen property. Violation of the conditional plea agreement justified the imposition of a greater sentence (see, People v Fowler, 167 AD2d 154, 155, lv denied 77 NY2d 838). Concur — Carro, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.), rendered September 13, 1990, convicting defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of attempted robbery in the second degree and sentencing him to a prison term of 2 Vs to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

At the plea allocution, defendant admitted that he and two accomplices robbed a man at knife-point in Manhattan on October 26, 1989.

Under the circumstances, the sentence imposed by the trial court was not excessive. At the plea allocution, the trial court made clear, and defendant indicated his understanding, that if defendant were to be arrested again he would face a prison term. Only nine days after this plea agreement was reached, defendant was arrested in New Jersey for receiving stolen property. Violation of the conditional plea agreement justified the imposition of a greater sentence (see, People v Fowler, 167 AD2d 154, 155, lv denied 77 NY2d 838). Concur — Carro, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

184 A.D.2d 432, 585 N.Y.S.2d 403, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8549, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-loizos-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack