People v. Victor M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Victor M.

104 A.D.2d 544, 479 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19992

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

DecidedSeptember 18, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 104 A.D.2d 544 (People v. Victor M.) 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. Victor M., 104 A.D.2d 544, 479 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19992 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— Motion granted, and, upon reargument, the order of this court entered on July 12, 1984 and the memorandum decision released therewith are recalled and vacated, and a new order and memorandum decision substituted therefor.

Defendant Victor M. moves to reargue our order, dated July 12,1984, which unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Milton Williams, J.), entered June 2,1982, which convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of the crime of assault in the first degree (Penal Law, § 120.10, subd 1) and imposed an indeterminate sentence of IV2 to 4% years. We modified this judgment only to the extent of classifying the conviction as that of a youthful offender.

On the evening of November 13, 1981, as a result of a family argument, the defendant stabbed his sister’s common-law husband in the heart with a knife. The victim survived. At the time of the crime, defendant was 18 years old and he did not have a prior criminal record. The defendant received the negotiated sentence. Thereafter, defendant appealed to this court, upon the basis that the sentencing Judge abused his discretion, by denying defendant’s application to be treated as a youthful offender. The reason we modified the judgment was that, after reviewing the probation report, we concluded that defendant possesses the potential to become a productive and law-abiding member of society. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Asch and Alexander, JJ.

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

— Motion granted, and, upon reargument, the order of this court entered on July 12, 1984 and the memorandum decision released therewith are recalled and vacated, and a new order and memorandum decision substituted therefor.

Defendant Victor M. moves to reargue our order, dated July 12,1984, which unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Milton Williams, J.), entered June 2,1982, which convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of the crime of assault in the first degree (Penal Law, § 120.10, subd 1) and imposed an indeterminate sentence of IV2 to 4% years. We modified this judgment only to the extent of classifying the conviction as that of a youthful offender.

On the evening of November 13, 1981, as a result of a family argument, the defendant stabbed his sister’s common-law husband in the heart with a knife. The victim survived. At the time of the crime, defendant was 18 years old and he did not have a prior criminal record. The defendant received the negotiated sentence. Thereafter, defendant appealed to this court, upon the basis that the sentencing Judge abused his discretion, by denying defendant’s application to be treated as a youthful offender. The reason we modified the judgment was that, after reviewing the probation report, we concluded that defendant possesses the potential to become a productive and law-abiding member of society. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Asch and Alexander, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 544, 479 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19992, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-victor-m-nyappdiv-1984.