People v. Michael E.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Michael E.

60 A.D.2d 635, 400 N.Y.S.2d 181, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14621

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

DecidedDecember 19, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 60 A.D.2d 635 (People v. Michael E.) 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. Michael E., 60 A.D.2d 635, 400 N.Y.S.2d 181, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14621 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County, imposed June 29, 1977, upon his adjudication as a youthful offender, the sentence being an indeterminate term of imprisonment of not more than three years. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing it to a five-year term of probation on condition, however, that defendant undergo appropriate psychiatric treatment. As so modified, sentence affirmed and case remanded to Criminal Term to fix the additional conditions of probation and for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). In our opinion the sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Hopkins, J. P., Latham, Margett and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County, imposed June 29, 1977, upon his adjudication as a youthful offender, the sentence being an indeterminate term of imprisonment of not more than three years. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing it to a five-year term of probation on condition, however, that defendant undergo appropriate psychiatric treatment. As so modified, sentence affirmed and case remanded to Criminal Term to fix the additional conditions of probation and for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). In our opinion the sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Hopkins, J. P., Latham, Margett and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.2d 635, 400 N.Y.S.2d 181, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14621, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-michael-e-nyappdiv-1977.