People v. Sapio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sapio

11 A.D.3d 567, 782 N.Y.S.2d 801, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11980

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

DecidedOctober 12, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 11 A.D.3d 567 (People v. Sapio) 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. Sapio, 11 A.D.3d 567, 782 N.Y.S.2d 801, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11980 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered March 19, 2003, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the County Court, Ulster County (Bruhn, J.), upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of assault in the second degree.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant admitted to the violation of probation, with the understanding that he would receive the sentence which was thereafter actually imposed. Accordingly, the defendant has no basis now to complain that the sentence was excessive (see People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816 [1984]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review. Ritter, J.P., H. Miller, Schmidt, Crane and Skelos, 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, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered March 19, 2003, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the County Court, Ulster County (Bruhn, J.), upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of assault in the second degree.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant admitted to the violation of probation, with the understanding that he would receive the sentence which was thereafter actually imposed. Accordingly, the defendant has no basis now to complain that the sentence was excessive (see People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816 [1984]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review. Ritter, J.P., H. Miller, Schmidt, Crane and Skelos, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.3d 567, 782 N.Y.S.2d 801, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11980, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sapio-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack