Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Nickel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided January 20, 2005Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Peters, J.P. (concurring in part and dissenting in part).

I dissent solely on the issue of sentence. I fail to find that the circumstances herein warrant modification of the sentence in the interest of justice.

Defendant pursued employment and volunteer positions that would place vulnerable children in his care and then victimized them for his own sexual gratification. Defendant maintained throughout these proceedings that such exploitation of these children was an acceptable expression of love, believing that they did not contest his sexual violation of them. These events were further…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. People v. GreeneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  2. People v. JurgensenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  3. People v. SerranoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  4. People v. DavidAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  5. People v. GeroAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API