AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. MELVIN HARTZOG, appellant. (Ind. No. 2976/97)

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the court improperly interjected itself into the proceedings is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. The court's questioning of witnesses facilitated an orderly progression of the trial, and the minimal interjections were proper ( see, People v. Yut Wai Tom, 53 N.Y.2d 44).

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant youthful offender status for this senseless and vicious crime despite his eligibility for such treatment ( see, People v. Vera, 206 A.D.2d 494; People v. Barr, 168 A.D.2d 625). Moreover, the sentence is not excessive or unduly harsh ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. HARTZOG
(Jul 12, 1999)