Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Anthony T. AVELLANET, appellant.
Appeals by the defendant from two amended judgments of the County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), both rendered September 25, 1998, revoking concurrent sentences of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he violated conditions thereof, after a hearing, and imposing sentences of imprisonment upon his prior convictions of aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree under Indictment No. 53/97 and driving while intoxicated under Superior Court Information No. 115/97.
ORDERED that the amended judgment rendered under Superior Court Information No. 115/97 is affirmed; and it is further,
ORDERED that the amended judgment rendered under Indictment No. 53/97 is reversed, on the law, the charge of violating the terms of the defendant's probation for his conviction of aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree is dismissed, and the sentence imposed thereon is vacated.
The evidence adduced at the hearing was sufficient to establish that the defendant violated the terms of his probation for his conviction of driving while intoxicated (see, People v. McCaffrey, 254 A.D.2d 304, 680 N.Y.S.2d 103; People v. Stoliker, 94 A.D.2d 854, 463 N.Y.S.2d 612). However, as the defendant was not informed that he was also being charged with violating the terms of his probation for his conviction of aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree, the court improperly determined that he violated the terms of his probation for that crime (see, CPL 410.70[2] ).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either without merit or academic.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: May 08, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)