Legal Opinion

People v. Michael O.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 1, 1968PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum.

The judgment should be affirmed. There was no abuse of discretion as a matter of law in the sentencing court’s refusal to permit disclosure of the presentence reports (People v. Peace, 18 N Y 2d 230). Specht v. Patterson (386 U. S. 605) and People v. Bailey (21 N Y 2d 588) are not relevant because they involved situations in which the court was without power to impose a special mode of punishment unless it first made an additional finding of fact beyond the underlying conviction for crime. However, there may be occasional situations in which disclosure, in whole or in part, may be…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Specht v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1967

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. ButlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  2. People v. HarrisNew York Supreme Court · 2001
  3. People v. GermainAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API