People v. Shahumyan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Shahumyan

5 A.D.3d 612, 772 N.Y.S.2d 854, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2729

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

DecidedMarch 15, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.3d 612 (People v. Shahumyan) 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. Shahumyan, 5 A.D.3d 612, 772 N.Y.S.2d 854, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2729 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.), rendered October 24, 2002, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the sentencing court [613]*613improperly considered charges of which he was acquitted as a basis for imposing sentence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Emmanus, 300 AD2d 504 [2002]), and, in any event, is without merit (see People v Emmanus, supra; People v Robinson, 250 AD2d 629 [1998]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Santucci, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Townes, 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 Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.), rendered October 24, 2002, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the sentencing court [613]*613improperly considered charges of which he was acquitted as a basis for imposing sentence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Emmanus, 300 AD2d 504 [2002]), and, in any event, is without merit (see People v Emmanus, supra; People v Robinson, 250 AD2d 629 [1998]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Santucci, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Townes, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.3d 612, 772 N.Y.S.2d 854, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2729, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-shahumyan-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack