People v. Winfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Winfield

163 A.D.2d 442

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

DecidedJuly 9, 1990

StatusPublished

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

Pincite

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

163 A.D.2d 442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-winfield-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack