From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Schalk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1993
198 A.D.2d 915 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

November 19, 1993

Appeal from the Onondaga County Court, Mulroy, J.

Present — Callahan, J.P., Pine, Lawton, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Following defendant's admission that he violated a condition of his probation, the court revoked his probation and imposed a sentence of 2 1/3 to 7 years imprisonment. At defendant's sentencing, the court had before it a presentence investigation report prepared eight months earlier, but did not obtain an updated presentence investigation report.

Although CPL 390.20 (1) requires a presentence investigation report when a sentence is imposed, an updated report is not necessary where the court is fully familiar with any changes in defendant's status, conduct or condition since the original report was prepared (see, People v Wilkinson, 197 A.D.2d 872; People v LaLonde, 178 A.D.2d 944, 945, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1003; People v Brand, 138 A.D.2d 966, 967, lv denied 71 N.Y.2d 966). The record demonstrates that the sentencing court was fully aware of defendant's status and conduct during the eight months that intervened after the original presentence investigation report was prepared.

We have reviewed defendant's sentence and conclude that it is neither harsh nor excessive.


Summaries of

People v. Schalk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1993
198 A.D.2d 915 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Schalk

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MICHAEL SCHALK…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 19, 1993

Citations

198 A.D.2d 915 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
604 N.Y.S.2d 660

Citing Cases

State v. Pomales

In any event, the record demonstrates that the court received an updated report from the Probation…

People v. Wright

The court did not err in sentencing defendant without the benefit of an updated presentence investigation…