People v. Stewart

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Stewart

269 A.D.2d 236, 702 N.Y.S.2d 814, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1532

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

DecidedFebruary 15, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 269 A.D.2d 236 (People v. Stewart) 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. Stewart, 269 A.D.2d 236, 702 N.Y.S.2d 814, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1532 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

” — Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John Perone, J.), rendered September 11, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 8 to 16 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence to a term of 5 to 10 years, and otherwise affirmed.

Defendant’s Grand Jury testimony was properly received in evidence at trial under the party-admissions exception to the hearsay rule (Prince, Richardson on Evidence § 8-201 [Farrell 11th ed]; People v Jones, 236 AD2d 217, lv denied 89 NY2d 1036).

[237]*237We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Ellerin and Saxe, JJ.

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

” — Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John Perone, J.), rendered September 11, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 8 to 16 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence to a term of 5 to 10 years, and otherwise affirmed.

Defendant’s Grand Jury testimony was properly received in evidence at trial under the party-admissions exception to the hearsay rule (Prince, Richardson on Evidence § 8-201 [Farrell 11th ed]; People v Jones, 236 AD2d 217, lv denied 89 NY2d 1036).

[237]*237We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Ellerin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 236, 702 N.Y.S.2d 814, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stewart-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack