People v. Schiebel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Schiebel

156 A.D.2d 601, 550 N.Y.S.2d 838, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15937

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

DecidedDecember 18, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 156 A.D.2d 601 (People v. Schiebel) 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. Schiebel, 156 A.D.2d 601, 550 N.Y.S.2d 838, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15937 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant, as limited by her brief, from an amended sentence of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), imposed October 4, 1988, upon a finding that she had violated conditions of probation, the sentence being six months’ imprisonment upon her previous conviction of grand larceny in the second degree.

Ordered that the amended sentence is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Rockland County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

There is no basis for modifying the amended sentence of incarceration (see, Penal Law § 60.01; see also, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). The defendant was advised when she was originally sentenced to a term of probation that a violation of its conditions could result in imprisonment. Her subsequent violations of those conditions were twice excused by the County Court. Mollen, P. J., Lawrence, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant, as limited by her brief, from an amended sentence of the County Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), imposed October 4, 1988, upon a finding that she had violated conditions of probation, the sentence being six months’ imprisonment upon her previous conviction of grand larceny in the second degree.

Ordered that the amended sentence is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Rockland County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

There is no basis for modifying the amended sentence of incarceration (see, Penal Law § 60.01; see also, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). The defendant was advised when she was originally sentenced to a term of probation that a violation of its conditions could result in imprisonment. Her subsequent violations of those conditions were twice excused by the County Court. Mollen, P. J., Lawrence, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 A.D.2d 601, 550 N.Y.S.2d 838, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-schiebel-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack