AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FRANK KING, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that the trial court erred in submitting a verdict sheet to the jury containing a summary of the statutory elements of the offenses charged (see, CPL 310.20). The issue was not preserved for our review (cf., People v Nimmons, 72 N.Y.2d 830, 831) and we decline to reach it in the interest of justice (see, People v Barber, 154 A.D.2d 882; People v Ryan, 152 A.D.2d 962; People v Monroe, 135 A.D.2d 741, 742). The sentencing court did not err in fixing the amount of restitution without a hearing. The record was sufficient to allow the court to make a finding "as to the fruits of the offense" (Penal Law § 60.27) based upon the victim's testimony (see, People v Welsher, 154 A.D.2d 915). On this record defendant's sentence is not excessive.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. KING
(Feb 2, 1990)