You are here: / / THE SENTENCING COURT’S REJECTION OF YOUTHFUL-OFFENDER STATUS FOR...

THE SENTENCING COURT’S REJECTION OF YOUTHFUL-OFFENDER STATUS FOR THE DEFENDANT UPHELD (CT APP).

The Court of Appeals, affirming the Appellate Division, determined the sentencing court properly rejected youthful-offender status for the defendant. People v Rivera, 2023 NY Slip Op 05967, CtApp 11-21-23

 

You might also like
TO PIERCE THE CORPORATE VEIL THE PLAINTIFF MUST DEMONSTRATE (1) THE OWNERS EXERCISED COMPLETE DOMINATION OF THE CORPORATION WITH RESPECT TO THE TRANSACTION AT ISSUE AND (2) THE DOMINATION WAS USED TO COMMIT A FRAUD OR WRONG AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF; HERE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THE TRANSACTION AT ISSUE WAS FRAUDULENT (CT APP).
RESOLVING A SPLIT OF AUTHORITY, THE COURT OF APPEALS HELD THE ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD (AFC) HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPEAL A CUSTODY DETERMINATION (CT APP).
Wilfulness Is Not an Element of Civil Contempt/Supreme Court Properly Drew a Negative Inference from Defendant’s Invocation of His Fifth Amendment Right Against Self-Incrimination
Anonymous Tip Alone, In the Absence of “Predictive Information,” Sufficient to Provide “Reasonable Suspicion” Justifying a Vehicle Stop
THE ACCUSATORY INSTRUMENT CHARGING DEFENDANT WITH “FAILURE TO PROVIDE NECESSARY SUSTENANCE” FOR A DOG, AN A MISDEMEANOR, WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY NONHEARSAY FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS; INSTRUMENT DISMISSED (CT APP).
THE FOIL REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY COUNSEL FOR THE BOARD OF PAROLE WAS PROPERLY DENIED; THE DOCUMENTS ARE PROTECTED FROM DISCLOSURE BY THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE (CT APP).
THE TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY TO DECEDENT’S CHILDREN WAS A VALID EXERCISE OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY; THE TRANSFER WAS COMPENSATION FOR CARE, NOT A GIFT; THE DISSENT ARGUED THERE WAS A QUESTION OF FACT WHETHER THE TRANSFER WAS A GIFT AND THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DID NOT AUTHORIZE GIFTS (CT APP). ​
THE DEFENSE WAS TIMELY PROVIDED WITH IMPEACHMENT INFORMATION REGARDING AN ARRESTING OFFICER; THE FACT THAT AN ADDITIONAL DOCUMENT WITH THAT INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED AFTER THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE (COC) WAS FILED, DID NOT RENDER THE PROSECUTION UNTIMELY (CT APP).

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

THE ROADBLOCK VEHICLE-STOP WAS VALID; THE SEARCH BASED UPON AN ODOR OF MARIJUANA... UNWARNED STATEMENTS MADE WHEN THE POLICE APPROACHED DEFENDANT GETTING OUT OF...