You are here: / / Parole Violation Did Not Preclude Application for Resentencing Under the...

Parole Violation Did Not Preclude Application for Resentencing Under the Drug Law Reform Act

The Fourth Department determined County Court erred when it denied defendant’s application for resentencing under the Drug Law Reform Act on the ground defendant was a reincarcerated parole violator.  Nor did it matter that defendant was released from parole supervision after he made the application.  People v Saffold, 666, 4th Dept, 6-7-13

 

You might also like
Employer Not Required to Accommodate Employee with Epilepsy with Permanent Light-Duty Assignment
Denial of Visitation With Incarcerated Father Upheld
Double Jeopardy Does Not Bar Prosecution of a Lesser Included Offense Never Considered by the Trier of Fact in the First Trial
Possible Error of Law Committed by Judge Did Not Warrant a Prohibition Action
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE FOR PRESS RELEASE ABOUT TATOO-RELATED INFECTIONS, PLAINTIFF UNABLE TO DEMONSTRATE MALICE.
THE PEOPLE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE THEIR WITNESSES READY FOR TRIAL IN ORDER FOR A STATEMENT OF READINESS TO BE VALID; THE MOTION TO DISMISS THE INDICTMENT ON SPEEDY-TRIAL GROUNDS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED; THE STATEMENTS OF READINESS WERE NOT ILLUSORY; THERE WAS A DISSENT (FOURTH DEPT).
MURDER CONVICTION REVERSED AS AGAINST THE WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE (FOURTH DEPT).
HEIGHT DIFFERENTIAL DEEMED DE MINIMUS AND NOT ACTIONABLE UNDER LABOR LAW 240(1), PIPE WHICH FELL WAS ONE FOOT ABOVE PLAINTIFF’S HEAD AND WITHIN HIS REACH.

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

People Did Not Meet Burden of Going Forward at Suppression Hearing National Labor Relations Board Had First Crack at Collective Bargaining Agreement...