People v. Nadja B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Nadja B.

23 A.D.3d 394, 805 N.Y.S.2d 549

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

DecidedNovember 7, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 23 A.D.3d 394 (People v. Nadja B.) 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. Nadja B., 23 A.D.3d 394, 805 N.Y.S.2d 549 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Resnik, J.), rendered July 20, 2004, convicting her of burglary in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing a determinate sentence of SVs years’ imprisonment.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, the conviction is deemed vacated and replaced with a finding that the defendant is a youthful offender (see CPL 720.20 [3]), and the sentence is reduced to a period of six months’ imprisonment to run concurrently with, and as a condition of, a term of five years’ probation, and the matter is remitted to County Court, Rockland County, to set the terms and conditions of probation, if any.

Under the particular circumstances of this case “the interests of justice would be served by relieving the [defendant] from the onus of a criminal record” (CPL 720.20 [1] [a]). The sentence imposed is excessive to the extent indicated. H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Ritter and Dillon, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Resnik, J.), rendered July 20, 2004, convicting her of burglary in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing a determinate sentence of SVs years’ imprisonment.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, the conviction is deemed vacated and replaced with a finding that the defendant is a youthful offender (see CPL 720.20 [3]), and the sentence is reduced to a period of six months’ imprisonment to run concurrently with, and as a condition of, a term of five years’ probation, and the matter is remitted to County Court, Rockland County, to set the terms and conditions of probation, if any.

Under the particular circumstances of this case “the interests of justice would be served by relieving the [defendant] from the onus of a criminal record” (CPL 720.20 [1] [a]). The sentence imposed is excessive to the extent indicated. H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Ritter and Dillon, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.3d 394, 805 N.Y.S.2d 549, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-nadja-b-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack