Legal Opinion
People v. Allen
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 2, 2012PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEgan Jr., J.
As the People concede, reversal is required. Although relevant factors to be taken into consideration in determining whether to ultimately grant defendant’s application for resentencing, neither defendant’s status as a parole violator nor his commission of a violent felony offense subsequent to the drug offense at issue renders him ineligible for resentencing as a matter of law (see People v Paulin, 17 NY3d 238, 244 [2011]; People v Chaires, 89 AD3d 1282, 1282 [2011]; People v Devivo, 87 AD3d 794, 795-796 [2011]). Accordingly, the order is reversed and this matter is remitted to County Court…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. PaulinNew York Court of Appeals · 2011
- People v. DevivoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. ChairesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
3Cited by6 opinions
- People v. AllenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- People v. AllenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. CristostomoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. AllenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. ScottAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.