You are here: / / Sentencing Court’s Reference to a Fine for Driving While Intoxicated a...
,

Sentencing Court’s Reference to a Fine for Driving While Intoxicated as “Mandatory” Required Remittal for Resentencing

The Third Department noted that imposition of both a fine and imprisonment for Driving While Intoxicated is discretionary.  County Court’s indication that the fine was “mandatory” required remittal for resentencing.  People v Olmstead, 105214, 3rd Dept 11-21-13

 

You might also like
PRIOR FORECLOSURE ACTIONS DISMISSED FOR LACK OF STANDING DO NOT ACCELERATE THE DEBT AND THEREFORE DO NOT START THE RUNNING OF THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS (THIRD DEPT).
FATHER’S PETITION FOR A MODIFICATION OF CUSTODY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DENIED WITHOUT A HEARING (THIRD DEPT). ​
FAILURE TO INSTRUCT THE JURY THAT ACQUITTAL ON THE TOP COUNT BASED UPON THE JUSTIFICATION DEFENSE REQUIRED ACQUITTAL ON ALL THE RELATED LESSER COUNTS REQUIRED REVERSAL (THIRD DEPT).
Father’s Incarceration Justified a Modification of Custody/Sole Custody Awarded to Mother
Sentencing Court Could Amend Restitution Amount But First Must Give Defendant Opportunity to Withdraw Guilty Plea
In Court of Claims Case, Inability to Prove State Was Served with Notice of Claim Required Dismissal
THE SENTENCING JUDGE’S REMARKS ABOUT THE DEFENDANT MIMICKED 19TH CENTURY POLYGENISM, A DEBUNKED RACIST IDEOLOGY; SENTENCE VACATED AND REDUCED (THIRD DEPT).
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AN APPEALABLE ORDER IN A SORA RISK-LEVEL PROCEEDING EXPLAINED (THIRD DEPT).

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

Suppression Hearing Should Have Been Held to Determine Whether Property Seized... Revocation of Parole Based Upon Uncharged Assault Okay/Presence of Assault Victim...