People v. Salem

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Salem

84 A.D.2d 769, 443 N.Y.S.2d 783, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15955

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

DecidedNovember 9, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 84 A.D.2d 769 (People v. Salem) 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. Salem, 84 A.D.2d 769, 443 N.Y.S.2d 783, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15955 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Thompson, J.), rendered September 29,1978, convicting him of a violation of probation, upon a plea of guilty, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of seven years. Judgment reversed, on the law, guilty plea vacated, and case remitted to Criminal Term for further proceedings. The defendant’s plea of guilty to the violation of probation was part of a plea agreement covering other offenses including a charge of forgery in the second degree. When the court determined that it would not accept the defendant’s plea to the forgery charge and would not sentence the defendant as agreed, it should have accorded the defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea of guilty to the probation charge. Lazer, J. P., Rabin, Cohalan and Bracken, 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 (Thompson, J.), rendered September 29,1978, convicting him of a violation of probation, upon a plea of guilty, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment with a maximum of seven years. Judgment reversed, on the law, guilty plea vacated, and case remitted to Criminal Term for further proceedings. The defendant’s plea of guilty to the violation of probation was part of a plea agreement covering other offenses including a charge of forgery in the second degree. When the court determined that it would not accept the defendant’s plea to the forgery charge and would not sentence the defendant as agreed, it should have accorded the defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea of guilty to the probation charge. Lazer, J. P., Rabin, Cohalan and Bracken, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 A.D.2d 769, 443 N.Y.S.2d 783, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-salem-nyappdiv-1981.