In satisfaction of an indictment charging him with greater crimes, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and received the sentence promised under the agreement. On appeal, defendant argues that he was sentenced on April 19, 1990 without benefit of a presentence report in violation of CPL 390.20. This argument is refuted by the record which indicates that a presentence report was stamped as having been delivered to the trial...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
