People v. Neely

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Neely

99 A.D.3d 578, 951 N.Y.2d 876

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 18, 2012·Published

Opinion

The court properly exercised its discretion in determining that substantial justice dictated denial of the defendant’s motion (see e.g. People v Gonzalez, 29 AD3d 400 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 867 [2006]). Defendant has demonstrated a “chronic inability to control his behavior while at liberty” (People v Correa, 83 AD3d 555, 556 [1st Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 805 [2011]), committing numerous crimes while on parole and even [579] while his resentencing application was pending. Concur — Friedman, J.E, Moskowitz, Freedman, Richter and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

The court properly exercised its discretion in determining that substantial justice dictated denial of the defendant’s motion (see e.g. People v Gonzalez, 29 AD3d 400 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 867 [2006]). Defendant has demonstrated a “chronic inability to control his behavior while at liberty” (People v Correa, 83 AD3d 555, 556 [1st Dept 2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 805 [2011]), committing numerous crimes while on parole and even [579] while his resentencing application was pending. Concur — Friedman, J.E, Moskowitz, Freedman, Richter and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

People v. Neely, 99 A.D.3d 578, 951 N.Y.2d 876 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

99 A.D.3d 578 (People v. Neely) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related