People v. Wong

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Wong

217 A.D.2d 640, 630 N.Y.S.2d 503, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7815

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

DecidedJuly 17, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 217 A.D.2d 640 (People v. Wong) 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. Wong, 217 A.D.2d 640, 630 N.Y.S.2d 503, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7815 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (McKay, J.), rendered June 2, 1993, convicting him of rape in the first degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, who was sentenced as a juvenile offender, received two indeterminate sentences of 31/s to 10 years imprisonment to run concurrently and one indeterminate sentence of 31/s to 10 years imprisonment to run consecutive to the first two sentences. Although there was no impropriety in the imposition of the sentences, pursuant to Penal Law § 70.30 (1) (d), the aggregate maximum term must be deemed 10 years and the aggregate mimimum term must be deemed 10 years and the aggregate minimum term must be deemed 5 years (see, People v Brunskill, 200 AD2d 752).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (McKay, J.), rendered June 2, 1993, convicting him of rape in the first degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, who was sentenced as a juvenile offender, received two indeterminate sentences of 31/s to 10 years imprisonment to run concurrently and one indeterminate sentence of 31/s to 10 years imprisonment to run consecutive to the first two sentences. Although there was no impropriety in the imposition of the sentences, pursuant to Penal Law § 70.30 (1) (d), the aggregate maximum term must be deemed 10 years and the aggregate mimimum term must be deemed 10 years and the aggregate minimum term must be deemed 5 years (see, People v Brunskill, 200 AD2d 752).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

217 A.D.2d 640, 630 N.Y.S.2d 503, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7815, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-wong-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack