People v. Nicholas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Nicholas

203 A.D.2d 306, 612 N.Y.S.2d 899

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

DecidedApril 4, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 203 A.D.2d 306 (People v. Nicholas) 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. Nicholas, 203 A.D.2d 306, 612 N.Y.S.2d 899 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered November 13, 1991, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). The defendant’s pro se contentions that the court erred in revoking his sentence of probation based on his commission of a homicide while on probation, and that CPL 410.10 (2) is unconstitutional, are without merit. Bracken, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Santucci and Altman, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered November 13, 1991, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). The defendant’s pro se contentions that the court erred in revoking his sentence of probation based on his commission of a homicide while on probation, and that CPL 410.10 (2) is unconstitutional, are without merit. Bracken, J. P., Miller, Copertino, Santucci and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 A.D.2d 306, 612 N.Y.S.2d 899, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-nicholas-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack