From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Burdick

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
May 15, 2019
172 A.D.3d 1087 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

2017–08508 S.C.I. No. 212/14

05-15-2019

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Amanda BURDICK, Appellant.

Hogan & Rossi, Brewster, N.Y. (MaryJane MacCrae of counsel), for appellant. Robert V. Tendy, District Attorney, Carmel, N.Y. (David M. Bishop of counsel), for respondent.


Hogan & Rossi, Brewster, N.Y. (MaryJane MacCrae of counsel), for appellant.

Robert V. Tendy, District Attorney, Carmel, N.Y. (David M. Bishop of counsel), for respondent.

ALAN D. SCHEINKMAN, P.J. RUTH C. BALKIN ROBERT J. MILLER SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, JJ.

DECISION & ORDERORDERED that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by providing that the terms of imprisonment shall run concurrently with each other; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

The sentence imposed was excessive to the extent indicated herein.

SCHEINKMAN, P.J., BALKIN, MILLER and HINDS–RADIX, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Burdick

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
May 15, 2019
172 A.D.3d 1087 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

People v. Burdick

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Amanda Burdick…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: May 15, 2019

Citations

172 A.D.3d 1087 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 3801
98 N.Y.S.3d 459