People v. Sepulveda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sepulveda

172 A.D.2d 223, 568 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4452

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

DecidedApril 9, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 172 A.D.2d 223 (People v. Sepulveda) 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. Sepulveda, 172 A.D.2d 223, 568 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4452 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold J. Rothwax, J.), rendered March 8, 1989, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing him, as a predicate felony offender, to a term of imprisonment of from six years to life, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the sentence and remanding the matter for resentence and, except as thus modified, affirmed.

As the People correctly concede, the sentence, adjudicating defendant a predicate felon, was illegal as a matter of law, since his sentence on the proposed predicate felony was, as a result of a reversal of the original judgment (see, People v Sepulveda, 105 AD2d 854), imposed after commission of the instant offense. (See, Penal Law § 70.06 [1] [b] [ii]; People v Maza, 118 AD2d 439, 440.) Thus, the matter should be remanded for resentencing. At such resentencing proceeding the People are not foreclosed from attempting to have defendant sentenced as a predicate felon since it appears that his prior criminal record includes at least one prior felony conviction which might serve as a basis for predicate felony status. (See, People v Santiago, 129 AD2d 411.)

In light of the result reached herein, we need not reach defendant’s remaining claims. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Ross and Kassal, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold J. Rothwax, J.), rendered March 8, 1989, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing him, as a predicate felony offender, to a term of imprisonment of from six years to life, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the sentence and remanding the matter for resentence and, except as thus modified, affirmed.

As the People correctly concede, the sentence, adjudicating defendant a predicate felon, was illegal as a matter of law, since his sentence on the proposed predicate felony was, as a result of a reversal of the original judgment (see, People v Sepulveda, 105 AD2d 854), imposed after commission of the instant offense. (See, Penal Law § 70.06 [1] [b] [ii]; People v Maza, 118 AD2d 439, 440.) Thus, the matter should be remanded for resentencing. At such resentencing proceeding the People are not foreclosed from attempting to have defendant sentenced as a predicate felon since it appears that his prior criminal record includes at least one prior felony conviction which might serve as a basis for predicate felony status. (See, People v Santiago, 129 AD2d 411.)

In light of the result reached herein, we need not reach defendant’s remaining claims. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin, Ross and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 A.D.2d 223, 568 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sepulveda-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack