People v. Scott
82 A.D.3d 655, 919 N.Y.2d 332
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Scott. Read the opinion of the Court — 61 A.D.3d 1348 →
Opinion
The court properly exercised its discretion in determining that substantial justice dictated denial of the motion. Defendant had an extensive record of felony drug convictions, and a very serious record of misconduct while incarcerated (see e.g. People v Hidalgo, 47 AD3d 455 [2008]). Concur — Tom, J.E, Sweeny, Catterson, Acosta and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Scott, 82 A.D.3d 655, 919 N.Y.2d 332 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).
82 A.D.3d 655 (People v. Scott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Hidalgo
47 A.D.3d 455 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)