People v. Wade

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Wade

49 A.D.2d 770, 372 N.Y.S.2d 731, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10771

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 29, 1975·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County, imposed July 5, 1973, upon his conviction of robbery in the second degree, on his plea of guilty, the sentence being an indeterminate prison term not to exceed 12 years. Sentence reversed, on the law, and case remitted to the Criminal Term for resentencing. The sentence imposed was not excessive. However, CPL 380.50 provides that, before pronouncing sentence, the court must ask the defendant whether he wishes to make a statement personally on his own behalf. Substantial compliance with this requirement is sufficient and an ambiguous invitation may be held sufficient in some circumstances (People v McLain, 35 NY2d 483). In the present case, although counsel was specifically invited to speak, nothing was said to defendant. To comply with the statute, there must be some invitation to defendant to speak. Rabin, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Margett and Christ, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County, imposed July 5, 1973, upon his conviction of robbery in the second degree, on his plea of guilty, the sentence being an indeterminate prison term not to exceed 12 years. Sentence reversed, on the law, and case remitted to the Criminal Term for resentencing. The sentence imposed was not excessive. However, CPL 380.50 provides that, before pronouncing sentence, the court must ask the defendant whether he wishes to make a statement personally on his own behalf. Substantial compliance with this requirement is sufficient and an ambiguous invitation may be held sufficient in some circumstances (People v McLain, 35 NY2d 483). In the present case, although counsel was specifically invited to speak, nothing was said to defendant. To comply with the statute, there must be some invitation to defendant to speak. Rabin, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Margett and Christ, JJ., concur.

People v. Wade, 49 A.D.2d 770, 372 N.Y.S.2d 731, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10771 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

49 A.D.2d 770 (People v. Wade) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related