People v. Paperman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Paperman

19 A.D.2d 656, 241 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3558

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

DecidedJune 24, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.2d 656 (People v. Paperman) 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. Paperman, 19 A.D.2d 656, 241 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3558 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered October 19, 1962 upon his plea of guilty, convicting him of criminally buying and receiving stolen property as a misdemeanor, and sentencing him to serve one year in the New York City Penitentiary. Defendant is at liberty on a certificate of reasonable doubt. Judgment modified on the law and on the facts to the extent of suspending the execution of [657]*657the sentence and placing the defendant on probation for a period of three years. As so modified, judgment affirmed. In our opinion, under all the circumstances here, the defendant, who is a first offender, is a proper subject for probation (cf. Penal Law, §§ 1308, 1937; Code Grim. Pro., § 933; People v. Zueherman, 5 N Y 2d 401; People ex rel. Goldberg v. Sheriff of Suffolk County, 206 Mise. 820; People v. Foote, 144 Mise. 134; People v. Silver, 10 A D 2d 274). Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur; Beldoek, P. J., and Klein-field, J., dissent and vote to affirm the judgment, with the following memorandum : On August 17, 1961 defendant was indicted for criminally buying and receiving stolen property as a felony, and for criminally concealing and withholding stolen and wrongfully acquired property, also as a felony. The subject matter of the theft was a trailer truck of considerable value. On May 14, 1962 the court exercised its discretion in accepting defendant’s plea of guilty to criminally buying and receiving stolen property as a misdemeanor. On October 19, 1962 defendant was sentenced to one year in the penitentiary. Where (as here) the defendant has been charged with a felony and he has been given consideration by the acceptance of a plea of guilty to a misdemeanor, these facts, together with the facts disclosed by the Probation Department’s presentenee investigation report, demonstrate that in this ease the sentence of one year in the penitentiary was a proper exercise of discretion on the part of the sentencing Judge and that such sentence should not be disturbed by an appellate court.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered October 19, 1962 upon his plea of guilty, convicting him of criminally buying and receiving stolen property as a misdemeanor, and sentencing him to serve one year in the New York City Penitentiary. Defendant is at liberty on a certificate of reasonable doubt. Judgment modified on the law and on the facts to the extent of suspending the execution of [657]*657the sentence and placing the defendant on probation for a period of three years. As so modified, judgment affirmed. In our opinion, under all the circumstances here, the defendant, who is a first offender, is a proper subject for probation (cf. Penal Law, §§ 1308, 1937; Code Grim. Pro., § 933; People v. Zueherman, 5 N Y 2d 401; People ex rel. Goldberg v. Sheriff of Suffolk County, 206 Mise. 820; People v. Foote, 144 Mise. 134; People v. Silver, 10 A D 2d 274). Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur; Beldoek, P. J., and Klein-field, J., dissent and vote to affirm the judgment, with the following memorandum : On August 17, 1961 defendant was indicted for criminally buying and receiving stolen property as a felony, and for criminally concealing and withholding stolen and wrongfully acquired property, also as a felony. The subject matter of the theft was a trailer truck of considerable value. On May 14, 1962 the court exercised its discretion in accepting defendant’s plea of guilty to criminally buying and receiving stolen property as a misdemeanor. On October 19, 1962 defendant was sentenced to one year in the penitentiary. Where (as here) the defendant has been charged with a felony and he has been given consideration by the acceptance of a plea of guilty to a misdemeanor, these facts, together with the facts disclosed by the Probation Department’s presentenee investigation report, demonstrate that in this ease the sentence of one year in the penitentiary was a proper exercise of discretion on the part of the sentencing Judge and that such sentence should not be disturbed by an appellate court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.2d 656, 241 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-paperman-nyappdiv-1963.