People v. Rodriguez

53 A.D.2d 877, 385 N.Y.S.2d 337, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13708
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Rodriguez. Read the opinion of the Court — 45 A.D.2d 41

Opinion

Appeal by the People from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County, imposed February 9, 1976, on the ground that it is invalid as a matter of law. Sentence reversed, on the law, and case [878]*878remitted to the Criminal Term for resentencing in accordance with the views expressed herein. The facts have not heen considered. CPL 720.10 excludes from youthful offender treatment youths indicted for a class A-I or A-II felony. That does not make it unconstitutional (see People v Santiago, 51 AD2d 1; cf. People v Drayton, 39 NY2d 580). It was therefore error to sentence the defendant herein as a youthful offender, since she had been indicted for a class A-I felony. Latham, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Shapiro and Titone, JJ., concur; Rabin, J., concurs in the result on constraint of People v Santiago (51 AD2d 1).

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

People v. Rodriguez, 53 A.D.2d 877, 385 N.Y.S.2d 337, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13708 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

53 A.D.2d 877 (People v. Rodriguez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Drayton
350 N.E.2d 377 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
People v. Santiago
51 A.D.2d 1 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1975)