People v. Trezza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Trezza

64 A.D.2d 681, 407 N.Y.S.2d 231, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12510

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

DecidedJuly 24, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 64 A.D.2d 681 (People v. Trezza) 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. Trezza, 64 A.D.2d 681, 407 N.Y.S.2d 231, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12510 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered March 9, 1977 and (2) (by permission) an order of the same court dated September 16, 1977, which denied his motion to vacate said judgment. Judgment and order affirmed. Assuming, arguendo, that the promise claimed to have been made to the defendant by the District Attorney was, in fact, made, that promise was based upon the fulfillment by the defendant of his concurrent promise to co-operate fully in the investigation and prosecution of narcotics dealers in Nassau County. The record makes it clear that the defendant refused to testify before the Grand Jury. On the issue of sentence, the record also makes it clear that the court adhered to the promise made to the defendant. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Suozzi, Shapiro and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered March 9, 1977 and (2) (by permission) an order of the same court dated September 16, 1977, which denied his motion to vacate said judgment. Judgment and order affirmed. Assuming, arguendo, that the promise claimed to have been made to the defendant by the District Attorney was, in fact, made, that promise was based upon the fulfillment by the defendant of his concurrent promise to co-operate fully in the investigation and prosecution of narcotics dealers in Nassau County. The record makes it clear that the defendant refused to testify before the Grand Jury. On the issue of sentence, the record also makes it clear that the court adhered to the promise made to the defendant. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Suozzi, Shapiro and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 A.D.2d 681, 407 N.Y.S.2d 231, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12510, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-trezza-nyappdiv-1978.