People v. Phillips

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Phillips

117 A.D.3d 544, 984 N.Y.S.2d 873

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

DecidedMay 15, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 117 A.D.3d 544 (People v. Phillips) 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. Phillips, 117 A.D.3d 544, 984 N.Y.S.2d 873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Lewis Bart Stone, J.), rendered May 10, 2012, convicting defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of attempted assault in the first degree, and sentencing her to a term of eight years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of amending the sentence and commitment sheet to reflect that defendant was convicted of attempted assault in the first degree rather than assault in the first degree, and otherwise affirmed.

Regardless of whether defendant validly waived her right to appeal, we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

The People concede that the sentence and commitment sheet should be amended to the extent indicated in order to correct a clerical error.

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Feinman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Lewis Bart Stone, J.), rendered May 10, 2012, convicting defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of attempted assault in the first degree, and sentencing her to a term of eight years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of amending the sentence and commitment sheet to reflect that defendant was convicted of attempted assault in the first degree rather than assault in the first degree, and otherwise affirmed.

Regardless of whether defendant validly waived her right to appeal, we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

The People concede that the sentence and commitment sheet should be amended to the extent indicated in order to correct a clerical error.

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Feinman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 A.D.3d 544, 984 N.Y.S.2d 873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-phillips-nyappdiv-2014.