People v. Zagarella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Zagarella

158 A.D.2d 636, 551 N.Y.S.2d 605, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1975

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

DecidedFebruary 20, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 158 A.D.2d 636 (People v. Zagarella) 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. Zagarella, 158 A.D.2d 636, 551 N.Y.S.2d 605, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1975 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

[637]*637The defendant contends that his sentence was improperly imposed because no hearing was conducted on his status as a second violent felony offender. However, inasmuch as the defendant elected to stand mute when arraigned on the second violent felony offender statement, his contention is without merit (see, CPL 400.15 [3], [4]; see also, People v Bouyea, 64 NY2d 1140; People v Tumminia, 101 AD2d 605). Nor should the sentence be disturbed on the ground that it is excessive. The defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would receive the sentence thereafter actually imposed and his assertion that the sentence should be reduced is without basis (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Sullivan, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.

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

[637]*637The defendant contends that his sentence was improperly imposed because no hearing was conducted on his status as a second violent felony offender. However, inasmuch as the defendant elected to stand mute when arraigned on the second violent felony offender statement, his contention is without merit (see, CPL 400.15 [3], [4]; see also, People v Bouyea, 64 NY2d 1140; People v Tumminia, 101 AD2d 605). Nor should the sentence be disturbed on the ground that it is excessive. The defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would receive the sentence thereafter actually imposed and his assertion that the sentence should be reduced is without basis (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Sullivan, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 A.D.2d 636, 551 N.Y.S.2d 605, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1975, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-zagarella-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack