From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Joseph R.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 14, 2011
952 N.E.2d 1064 (N.Y. 2011)

Opinion

No. 183 SSM 12.

Decided June 14, 2011.

APPEAL, by permission of an Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, entered June 22, 2010. The Appellate Division (1) reversed, on the law, a judgment of the Suffolk County Court (Barbara Kahn, J.), which had adjudicated defendant a youthful offender upon his plea of guilty to use of a child in a sexual performance, (2) vacated the youthful offender adjudication and sentence imposed thereon, and (3) remitted the matter for further proceedings.

People v Joseph R., 74 AD3d 1244, reversed.

O'Sullivan Zacchea, PLLC, Kew Gardens ( Daniel R. De-Marco of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead ( Thomas Constant of counsel), for respondent.

Concur: Chief Judge LIPPMAN and Judges CIPARICK, GRAFFEO, READ, SMITH, PIGOTT and JONES.


OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, and case remitted to the Appellate Division, Second Department, with directions to dismiss the People's appeal to that court. No statute authorized the appeal by the People to the Appellate Division from the County Court judgment adjudicating defendant a youthful offender.


Summaries of

People v. Joseph R.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 14, 2011
952 N.E.2d 1064 (N.Y. 2011)
Case details for

People v. Joseph R.

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE c., Respondent, v. JOSEPH R.(Anonymous), Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jun 14, 2011

Citations

952 N.E.2d 1064 (N.Y. 2011)
952 N.E.2d 1064
929 N.Y.S.2d 71
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 5116

Citing Cases

People v. Tony C.

The Criminal Procedure Law expressly enumerates and describes the orders appealable by the People to the…

People v. Pagan

Consequently, the proper vehicle to have challenged Supreme Court's January 2009 modification order was an…