People v. Youngs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Youngs

212 A.D.2d 1001, 622 N.Y.S.2d 835, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1870

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

DecidedFebruary 3, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 212 A.D.2d 1001 (People v. Youngs) 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. Youngs, 212 A.D.2d 1001, 622 N.Y.S.2d 835, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of rape in the third degree, defendant contends for the first time that the integrity of the Grand Jury proceeding was impaired because the indictment was based on perjured testimony and testimony concerning uncharged instances of sexual contact. That contention is unpreserved for review (see, People v Iannelli, 69 NY2d 684, 685, cert denied 482 US 914) and, in any event, is unsupported by the record.

Defendant also contends that his sentence is both unlawful and harsh and excessive. Defendant was sentenced to a determinate term of four months in jail and to five years of probation. Pursuant to Penal Law § 60.01 (2) (d), the total term of jail and probation shall not exceed the maximum term of probation authorized in Penal Law article 65 and the sentence of imprisonment shall run concurrently with the sentence of probation. The sentence of five years of probation is authorized (see, Penal Law § 65.00 [3] [a] [i]). The sentence of imprisonment must be construed to run concurrently with the term of probation. Thus, the sentence is lawful. We also conclude that defendant’s sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are lacking in merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Yates County Court, Falvey, J.—Rape, 3rd Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Wesley, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of rape in the third degree, defendant contends for the first time that the integrity of the Grand Jury proceeding was impaired because the indictment was based on perjured testimony and testimony concerning uncharged instances of sexual contact. That contention is unpreserved for review (see, People v Iannelli, 69 NY2d 684, 685, cert denied 482 US 914) and, in any event, is unsupported by the record.

Defendant also contends that his sentence is both unlawful and harsh and excessive. Defendant was sentenced to a determinate term of four months in jail and to five years of probation. Pursuant to Penal Law § 60.01 (2) (d), the total term of jail and probation shall not exceed the maximum term of probation authorized in Penal Law article 65 and the sentence of imprisonment shall run concurrently with the sentence of probation. The sentence of five years of probation is authorized (see, Penal Law § 65.00 [3] [a] [i]). The sentence of imprisonment must be construed to run concurrently with the term of probation. Thus, the sentence is lawful. We also conclude that defendant’s sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are lacking in merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Yates County Court, Falvey, J.—Rape, 3rd Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Wesley, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 A.D.2d 1001, 622 N.Y.S.2d 835, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-youngs-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack