People v. Rogler

186 A.D.2d 1076, 590 N.Y.S.2d 803, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11746
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 7, 1992·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Upon our review of the record and consideration of the relevant factors (see, People v Cruickshank, 105 AD2d 325, 333-334, affd sub nom. People v Dawn Maria C., 67 NY2d 625), we find no abuse of discretion in the court’s denial of defendant’s application for youthful offender status (see, People v New, 171 AD2d 1006, lv denied 77 NY2d 998; People v Ortega, 114 AD2d 912, lv denied 67 NY2d 887). Further, we decline to exercise our discretion in the interest of justice to grant him that status (cf., People v Shrubsall, 167 AD2d 929, 930). Finally, the sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Hannigan, J. — Criminally Negligent Homicide.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Green, Balio, Fallon and Davis, JJ.

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

People v. Rogler, 186 A.D.2d 1076, 590 N.Y.S.2d 803, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11746 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

186 A.D.2d 1076 (People v. Rogler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Fagan
270 A.D.2d 840 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
People v. Drayton
198 A.D.2d 770 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)