People v. Travers

234 A.D.2d 808, 652 N.Y.S.2d 121, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12594
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 19, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 234 A.D.2d 808 (People v. Travers) 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. Travers, 234 A.D.2d 808, 652 N.Y.S.2d 121, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12594 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Scarano, Jr., J.), rendered January 10, 1995, which revoked defendant’s probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.

Defendant was convicted in October 1994, upon her plea of guilty of the crime of arson in the fourth degree, and was sentenced to a term of six months in jail and five years’ proba[809]*809tion. Defendant was subsequently found to have violated the terms of her probation when she absconded from a residential psychiatric treatment program and failed to keep scheduled appointments with her probation officer. As a result, defendant’s probation was revoked and she was sentenced to a prison term of 1 to 3 years.

Defendant appeals, contending that County Court erred by failing to order an updated presentence report prior to imposing the term of imprisonment. We disagree. Whether to obtain an updated presentence report prior to resentencing lies within the discretion of the sentencing court (see, People v Kuey, 83 NY2d 278, 282). County Court did not abuse its discretion here where neither defendant nor her attorney requested an updated presentence report and where the original report was less than three months old and had been supplemented by more recent information from defendant’s probation officer (see, People v Moon, 225 AD2d 826, 827-828, lv denied 88 NY2d 939). Given defendant’s admitted failure to abide by the conditions of her probation, we find no reason to disturb the sentence imposed by County Court.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, White, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

People v. Fernandez
7 A.D.3d 886 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
People v. Gardner
278 A.D.2d 862 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
People v. Pearl
257 A.D.2d 773 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
People v. Defayette
241 A.D.2d 761 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
234 A.D.2d 808, 652 N.Y.S.2d 121, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-travers-nyappdiv-1996.