People v. Ruquet

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ruquet

121 A.D.2d 482, 503 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58458

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

DecidedJune 9, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 121 A.D.2d 482 (People v. Ruquet) 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. Ruquet, 121 A.D.2d 482, 503 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58458 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Copertino, J.), rendered September 9, 1985, convicting him of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol as a felony, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

[483]*483The defendant’s contentions are either unpreserved or without merit. With respect to his claim that his sentence was excessive, the defendant’s long history of offenses involving driving while intoxicated and his demonstrated inability to abide by parole conditions convinces us that the sentencing court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the maximum sentence. Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Copertino, J.), rendered September 9, 1985, convicting him of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol as a felony, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

[483]*483The defendant’s contentions are either unpreserved or without merit. With respect to his claim that his sentence was excessive, the defendant’s long history of offenses involving driving while intoxicated and his demonstrated inability to abide by parole conditions convinces us that the sentencing court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the maximum sentence. Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 A.D.2d 482, 503 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ruquet-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack