People v Robert Hawkins
Annotate this Case
People v Hawkins
2003 NY Slip Op 18646 [1 AD3d 1064]
Decided on November 21, 2003
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Decided on November 21, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, HURLBUTT, KEHOE, AND HAYES, JJ.
1288 KA 02-00046
[*1]PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, ORDER
v
ROBERT HAWKINS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Appeal from a judgment of Monroe County Court (Maloy, J.), entered November 21, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of grand larceny in the third degree.
EDWARD J. NOWAK, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (SHIRLEY A. GORMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
HOWARD R. RELIN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (DANIEL P. MAJCHRZAK, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Entered: November 21, 2003JoAnn M. Wahl
Clerk of the Court
Decided on November 21, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, HURLBUTT, KEHOE, AND HAYES, JJ.
1288 KA 02-00046
[*1]PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, ORDER
v
ROBERT HAWKINS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Appeal from a judgment of Monroe County Court (Maloy, J.), entered November 21, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of grand larceny in the third degree.
EDWARD J. NOWAK, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (SHIRLEY A. GORMAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
HOWARD R. RELIN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (DANIEL P. MAJCHRZAK, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Entered: November 21, 2003JoAnn M. Wahl
Clerk of the Court
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
