People v. Pena

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pena

51 A.D.2d 561, 378 N.Y.S.2d 737, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10820

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

DecidedJanuary 19, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 561 (People v. Pena) 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. Pena, 51 A.D.2d 561, 378 N.Y.S.2d 737, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10820 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered December 28, 1972, convicting him, after trial, of criminally selling a dangerous drug in the third degree (two counts) and criminally possessing a dangerous drug in the fourth and sixth degrees (four counts) and imposing sentence. By an order dated July 29, 1974, this court reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial, on the authority of People v Goggins (34 NY2d 163). On October 30, 1975 the Court of Appeals reversed the order of this court and remitted the case to this court for review of the facts (People v Pena, 45 AD2d 1038, revd 37 NY2d 642). Judgment affirmed. The trial court properly refused to compel disclosure of an informant’s identity (People v Pena, 37 NY2d 642, supra) and the sentence imposed was not excessive. Gulotta, P. J„ Hopkins, Martuscello, Christ and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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 December 28, 1972, convicting him, after trial, of criminally selling a dangerous drug in the third degree (two counts) and criminally possessing a dangerous drug in the fourth and sixth degrees (four counts) and imposing sentence. By an order dated July 29, 1974, this court reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial, on the authority of People v Goggins (34 NY2d 163). On October 30, 1975 the Court of Appeals reversed the order of this court and remitted the case to this court for review of the facts (People v Pena, 45 AD2d 1038, revd 37 NY2d 642). Judgment affirmed. The trial court properly refused to compel disclosure of an informant’s identity (People v Pena, 37 NY2d 642, supra) and the sentence imposed was not excessive. Gulotta, P. J„ Hopkins, Martuscello, Christ and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 561, 378 N.Y.S.2d 737, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10820, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pena-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack