People v. Miranda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Miranda

160 A.D.2d 373, 554 N.Y.S.2d 1001, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3998

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

DecidedApril 12, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 160 A.D.2d 373 (People v. Miranda) 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. Miranda, 160 A.D.2d 373, 554 N.Y.S.2d 1001, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3998 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered February 24, 1988, convicting defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and sentencing her to an indeterminate prison term of from 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The defendant’s application for waiver of the mandatory surcharge due to indigency is premature. (People v Velez, 150 AD2d 514, Iv denied 74 NY2d 748.) In any event, we find defendant’s arguments concerning the constitutionality of the imposition of the surcharge to be meritless. (See, People v Barnes, 62 NY2d 702.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Asch and Smith, JJ.

[Republish]

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.), rendered February 24, 1988, convicting defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and sentencing her to an indeterminate prison term of from 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The defendant’s application for waiver of the mandatory surcharge due to indigency is premature. (People v Velez, 150 AD2d 514, Iv denied 74 NY2d 748.) In any event, we find defendant’s arguments concerning the constitutionality of the imposition of the surcharge to be meritless. (See, People v Barnes, 62 NY2d 702.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Asch and Smith, JJ.

[Republish]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 A.D.2d 373, 554 N.Y.S.2d 1001, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-miranda-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack