History
  • No items yet
midpage
People v. Paulin
952 N.Y.2d 543
N.Y. App. Div.
2012
Check Treatment

The court properly exercised its discretion in finding that substantial justice dictates denial of defendant’s motion (see e.g. People v Gonzalez, 29 AD3d 400 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 867 [2006]). Defendant’s continued pattern of criminal activity while on parole and his poor prison disciplinary record demonstrate that he has little remorse for his actions. While on parole, defendant was indicted for grand larceny and conspiracy, convicted of four new misdemeanor offenses, had his parole revoked three times and committed seven infractions while incarcerated (see People v Paulin, 17 NY3d 238 [2011]). Concur — Andrias, J.E, Sweeny, Catterson, Moskowitz and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Paulin
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Oct 18, 2012
Citation: 952 N.Y.2d 543
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.