People v. Romulus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Romulus

162 A.D.2d 301, 559 N.Y.S.2d 131, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7455

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

DecidedJune 21, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 162 A.D.2d 301 (People v. Romulus) 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. Romulus, 162 A.D.2d 301, 559 N.Y.S.2d 131, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7455 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J.), rendered December 9, 1987, convicting defendant, upon a jury verdict, of two counts of robbery in the second degree and sentencing him as a second violent felony offender to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of from 6 to 12 years on each count to run concurrently, unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, [302]*302the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence (People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Carro, Milonas and Rosenberger, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J.), rendered December 9, 1987, convicting defendant, upon a jury verdict, of two counts of robbery in the second degree and sentencing him as a second violent felony offender to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of from 6 to 12 years on each count to run concurrently, unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, [302]*302the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence (People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Carro, Milonas and Rosenberger, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 A.D.2d 301, 559 N.Y.S.2d 131, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-romulus-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack