People v. Winfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Winfield

163 A.D.2d 442

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Winfield. Read the opinion of the Court — 145 A.D.2d 449 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 9, 1990·Published

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the County Court, Dutchess County (King, J.), imposed July 6, 1987, upon his conviction of burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that his sentence constituted cruel and inhuman punishment is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Ingram, 67 NY2d 897, 899), and is, in any event, without merit. Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the County Court, Dutchess County (King, J.), imposed July 6, 1987, upon his conviction of burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that his sentence constituted cruel and inhuman punishment is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Ingram, 67 NY2d 897, 899), and is, in any event, without merit. Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

People v. Winfield, 163 A.D.2d 442 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

163 A.D.2d 442 (People v. Winfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related