Legal Opinion
People v. Mannino
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 29, 2011PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.20 to set aside so much of his sentence as imposed consecutive terms of imprisonment for his convictions of murder in the second degree (see Penal Law § 125.25 [3]), robbery in the first degree (see Penal Law § 160.15 [3]), and arson in the third degree (see Penal Law § 150.10 [1]). The challenged consecutive sentences were imposed pursuant to the statutory sentencing scheme that requires concurrent sentences to be imposed “[w]hen more than one sentence of imprisonment is imposed on a person for two or more offenses…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Cunningham v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Oregon v. IceSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- People v. LaureanoNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- People v. HolmesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. WalkerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. SlocumAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
- People v. SlocumAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
- People v. WalkerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014