Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People of the State of New York v. Kenley Peck

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department


November 16, 2012

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
RESPONDENT,
v.
KENLEY PECK,
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Jeffrey R. Merrill, A.J.), rendered January 8, 2008.

People v Peck

Released on November 16, 2012

Appellate Division, Fourth Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

The appeal was held by this Court by order entered December 23, 2011, decision was reserved and the matter was remitted to Onondaga County Court for further proceedings (90 AD3d 1500). The proceedings were held and completed (Jeffrey R. Merrill, A.J.).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of burglary in the third degree (Penal Law § 140.20). This Court previously held the case, reserved decision and remitted the matter to County Court "to conduct an inquiry to determine whether there was a legitimate basis for defendant's termination from the drug treatment program, including whether defendant's postplea arrests were without foundation" (People v Peck, 90 AD3d 1500, 1501). We conclude that, upon remittal, the court conducted a sufficient inquiry pursuant to People v Outley (80 NY2d 702, 713) to satisfy itself that defendant's postplea arrest in Camillus, New York had a legitimate basis and thus constituted a violation of the conditions of the drug treatment program and the plea agreement (see People v Fiammegta, 14 NY3d 90, 97; People v Marshall, 231 AD2d 893, 894-895, lv denied 89 NY2d 866). Inasmuch as we conclude that defendant's arrest in Camillus justified his removal from the drug treatment program, we need not address defendant's remaining contentions. Entered: November 16, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

20121116

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.