People v. Pagan

172 A.D.2d 233, 567 N.Y.S.2d 730, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4461
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 9, 1991
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 172 A.D.2d 233 (People v. Pagan) 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. Pagan, 172 A.D.2d 233, 567 N.Y.S.2d 730, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4461 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, New York County (Leslie Crocker Snyder, J.), rendered April 21, 1989, convicting defendant on his plea of guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of from three to nine years incarceration, unanimously affirmed.

On September 23, 1988, defendant pleaded guilty to a violation of probation for possession of heroin, and was "restored to probation” pending sentencing on November 18, 1988. A presentence report, which recommended incarceration due to defendant’s failure to attend a drug rehabilitation program, was prepared for November 18, but defendant failed to appear, and was eventually returned on a warrant on April 21, 1989. At that time, the court revoked probation and sentenced defendant as noted above.

We reject defendant’s argument that new charges and a new hearing were required prior to revoking defendant’s probation. The argument is predicated on the assumption that when the court restored defendant to probation on September 23, it was, in fact, pronouncing sentence. In context, and given the fact that a date was set for sentencing, we think it clear that the court simply meant that defendant was to remain at liberty pending sentence.

[234]*234Nor, under the circumstances presented, was it error for the court to sentence defendant without ordering a presentence report detailing his activities during the five-month period in which he was an absconder. (Cf, People v Gordon, 155 AD2d 225.) The presentence report prepared for the November 18, 1988 sentencing date was sufficient.

We have examined defendant’s other argument and find it to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger, Asch and Smith, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Brandon
35 A.D.3d 876 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. Jennings
247 A.D.2d 292 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
People v. Santiago
187 A.D.2d 384 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
172 A.D.2d 233, 567 N.Y.S.2d 730, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pagan-nyappdiv-1991.