People v. Pratt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pratt

119 A.D.2d 839, 501 N.Y.S.2d 465, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55792

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

DecidedApril 28, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 119 A.D.2d 839 (People v. Pratt) 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. Pratt, 119 A.D.2d 839, 501 N.Y.S.2d 465, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55792 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Westchester County (Edelstein, J.), imposed July 14, 1983, upon his conviction of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being a definite term of four months in the county jail and four years and seven months’ probation.

Sentence affirmed.

The sentence imposed upon the defendant was neither excessive nor unduly harsh.

We note that the People request this court to modify the imposed sentence since Criminal Term should have imposed the statutorily mandated sentence of five years’ probation, with a condition that the defendant serve a period of four months’ imprisonment as a part of the probationary term (see, Penal Law §§ 60.01 [2], [3]; 65.00 [3] [a] [i]). However, since the People have not cross-appealed, the issue is not properly before us (see, CPL 450.20 [4]; 450.30 [2]; Matter of Morgenthau v Roberts, 47 AD2d 826). Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Westchester County (Edelstein, J.), imposed July 14, 1983, upon his conviction of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being a definite term of four months in the county jail and four years and seven months’ probation.

Sentence affirmed.

The sentence imposed upon the defendant was neither excessive nor unduly harsh.

We note that the People request this court to modify the imposed sentence since Criminal Term should have imposed the statutorily mandated sentence of five years’ probation, with a condition that the defendant serve a period of four months’ imprisonment as a part of the probationary term (see, Penal Law §§ 60.01 [2], [3]; 65.00 [3] [a] [i]). However, since the People have not cross-appealed, the issue is not properly before us (see, CPL 450.20 [4]; 450.30 [2]; Matter of Morgenthau v Roberts, 47 AD2d 826). Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 A.D.2d 839, 501 N.Y.S.2d 465, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55792, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pratt-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack