People v. Ramirez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ramirez

63 A.D.2d 687, 404 N.Y.S.2d 657, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11585

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

DecidedMay 8, 1978

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 63 A.D.2d 687 (People v. Ramirez) 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. Ramirez, 63 A.D.2d 687, 404 N.Y.S.2d 657, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11585 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered April 22, 1976, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing an indeterminate sentence with a minimum of one and one-half years and a maximum of life imprisonment on the criminal sale count, and a conditional discharge on the criminal possession count. Judgment affirmed. Once again we are confronted with a situation where the statutorily mandated sentence far exceeds the punishment which is appropriate for the acts performed (see People v Castillo, 61 AD2d 1034). The defendant, a 46-year-old man with no prior criminal record, faces the possibility of lifetime parole as the result of his sale of $20 worth of cocaine to an undercover police officer. Hopkins, J. P., Hartuscello, Shapiro and O’Connor, 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 April 22, 1976, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing an indeterminate sentence with a minimum of one and one-half years and a maximum of life imprisonment on the criminal sale count, and a conditional discharge on the criminal possession count. Judgment affirmed. Once again we are confronted with a situation where the statutorily mandated sentence far exceeds the punishment which is appropriate for the acts performed (see People v Castillo, 61 AD2d 1034). The defendant, a 46-year-old man with no prior criminal record, faces the possibility of lifetime parole as the result of his sale of $20 worth of cocaine to an undercover police officer. Hopkins, J. P., Hartuscello, Shapiro and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A.D.2d 687, 404 N.Y.S.2d 657, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ramirez-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack