People v. Trouche

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Trouche

224 A.D.2d 836, 638 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1317

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 224 A.D.2d 836 (People v. Trouche) 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. Trouche, 224 A.D.2d 836, 638 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1317 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.), entered October 11, 1994, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

Defendant was found with a razor blade in his possession while confined at a State correctional facility. He subsequently pleaded guilty to attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree and was sentenced to a prison term of Vh to 3 years to run consecutive to the sentence he was then serving. On appeal, defendant argues that this criminal prosecution is barred by the doctrine of double jeopardy because he was punished for the same incident as the result of a prior prison disciplinary hearing. Inasmuch as we have previously rejected claims such as this (see, People v Nunez, 186 AD2d 317, lv denied 81 NY2d 765; People v Frye, 144 AD2d 714, lv denied 73 NY2d 891), we find defendant’s argument to be without merit. We further find that the sentence imposed is neither harsh nor excessive given the nature of the crime and the fact that the sentence imposed was the most lenient permitted by statute.

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

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

—Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.), entered October 11, 1994, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

Defendant was found with a razor blade in his possession while confined at a State correctional facility. He subsequently pleaded guilty to attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree and was sentenced to a prison term of Vh to 3 years to run consecutive to the sentence he was then serving. On appeal, defendant argues that this criminal prosecution is barred by the doctrine of double jeopardy because he was punished for the same incident as the result of a prior prison disciplinary hearing. Inasmuch as we have previously rejected claims such as this (see, People v Nunez, 186 AD2d 317, lv denied 81 NY2d 765; People v Frye, 144 AD2d 714, lv denied 73 NY2d 891), we find defendant’s argument to be without merit. We further find that the sentence imposed is neither harsh nor excessive given the nature of the crime and the fact that the sentence imposed was the most lenient permitted by statute.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D.2d 836, 638 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-trouche-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack