People v. Mirasola

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mirasola

64 A.D.2d 930, 407 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12818

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

DecidedAugust 16, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 64 A.D.2d 930 (People v. Mirasola) 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. Mirasola, 64 A.D.2d 930, 407 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12818 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County, imposed August 1, 1978, upon his adjudication as a youthful offender, following his plea of guilty to a criminal charge, the sentence being a period of imprisonment of 60 days, plus an additional period of probation of 2 years and 10 months. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing it to [931]*931a three-year period of probation less the amount of time the defendant has already served in prison, with the conditions of probation to be as was previously fixed by Criminal Term. As so modified, sentence affirmed. In our opinion, the sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Titone and Shapiro, 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 August 1, 1978, upon his adjudication as a youthful offender, following his plea of guilty to a criminal charge, the sentence being a period of imprisonment of 60 days, plus an additional period of probation of 2 years and 10 months. Sentence modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing it to [931]*931a three-year period of probation less the amount of time the defendant has already served in prison, with the conditions of probation to be as was previously fixed by Criminal Term. As so modified, sentence affirmed. In our opinion, the sentence was excessive to the extent indicated herein. Hopkins, J. P., Damiani, Titone and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 A.D.2d 930, 407 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12818, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mirasola-nyappdiv-1978.