People v. Wright

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Wright

40 A.D.2d 940, 337 N.Y.S.2d 585, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3538

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

DecidedNovember 2, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 40 A.D.2d 940 (People v. Wright) 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. Wright, 40 A.D.2d 940, 337 N.Y.S.2d 585, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3538 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, insofar as it sentences defendant, unanimously reversed on the law and defendant remanded to Oswego County Court for resentencing, and otherwise judgment affirmed. • Memorandum: Upon accepting defendant’s plea of guilty, the court was not required to make further inquiry as to guilt since the record establishes that defendant understood the consequences of his plea and there was no claim of innocence. (People v. Dixon, 29 N Y 2d 55; People v. Nixon, 21 N Y 2d 338; cf. People v. Beasley, 25 N Y 2d 483.) However, the record discloses that the court failed to set forth its reasons for imposing a minimum sentence as mandated by section 70.00 (subd. 3, par. [b]) of the Penal Law. Accordingly, defendant should be resentenced. (Appeal from judgment of Oswego County Court convicting defendant of burglary, third degree.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Marsh, Witmer, Gabrielli and Moule, JJ.

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

Judgment, insofar as it sentences defendant, unanimously reversed on the law and defendant remanded to Oswego County Court for resentencing, and otherwise judgment affirmed. • Memorandum: Upon accepting defendant’s plea of guilty, the court was not required to make further inquiry as to guilt since the record establishes that defendant understood the consequences of his plea and there was no claim of innocence. (People v. Dixon, 29 N Y 2d 55; People v. Nixon, 21 N Y 2d 338; cf. People v. Beasley, 25 N Y 2d 483.) However, the record discloses that the court failed to set forth its reasons for imposing a minimum sentence as mandated by section 70.00 (subd. 3, par. [b]) of the Penal Law. Accordingly, defendant should be resentenced. (Appeal from judgment of Oswego County Court convicting defendant of burglary, third degree.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Marsh, Witmer, Gabrielli and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.2d 940, 337 N.Y.S.2d 585, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3538, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-wright-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack