People v Francis

Annotate this Case
People v Francis 2021 NY Slip Op 03608 Decided on June 9, 2021 Appellate Division, Second 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 June 9, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.
2019-02690
2019-02691
(Ind. No. 190/17, S.C.I. No. 196/18)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

John A. Francis, appellant.



Thomas N. N. Angell, Poughkeepsie, NY (Jennifer Burton of counsel), for appellant.

William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Peter M. Forman, J.), rendered January 24, 2019, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree under Superior Court Information No. 196/18, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court, also rendered January 24, 2019, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree under Indictment No. 190/17.

ORDERED that the judgment and the amended judgment are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the County Court, when imposing sentence, relied upon reliable information in the presentence report (see People v Haslow, 20 AD3d 680). The sentences imposed were not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

RIVERA, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, CONNOLLY and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

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.