The Law Lion Logo - AI-powered legal writing assistantThe Law Lion
Home
Features
Pricing
Services
AboutBlogCasesContact
Login
Ask Law Lion AI
  1. Home
  2. >Cases
  3. >The People of the State of New York v. Mario Milan
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

The People of the State of New York v. Mario Milan

3 citations

Table of Contents

  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic Massaro, J.), rendered August...

Table of Contents

  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic Massaro, J.), rendered August...

No summary available for this case.

Opinions

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic Massaro, J.), rendered August 28, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 8 to 16 years, unanimously modified to reduce the sentence to 5 to 10 years and otherwise affirmed.

*240There was sufficient evidence to enable the hearing court to make an independent determination regarding the existence of probable cause, despite the responding officer’s failure to explicitly describe the kind of clothing worn by defendant at the time of his arrest, or to state that defendant matched the description provided by the undercover officer, because the officer specified the description and location provided by the undercover officer, and indicated that when he entered the building lobby within two minutes of the transmission, he found several people there but detained only this defendant (People v Nieves, 213 AD2d 182).

Since defendant did not object to the supplemental reasonable doubt instructions provided by the court, his contention that he was not provided with either notice of the jury’s note or an opportunity to help formulate the court’s response is unpreserved (People v Stewart, 81 NY2d 877, 878-879), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Nor is appellate review possible in light of defendant’s failure to provide an adequate record (People v Clariot, 188 AD2d 281, 282, Iv denied 81 NY2d 838). We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

The Law Lion logoThe Law Lion.

The Law Lion is the only platform combining AI legal writing grounded in real case law with an expert human writing service — serving attorneys, paralegals, and everyday people nationwide.

info@thelawlion.com
Mon–Fri 9am–6pm EST · Rush available
Serving Clients Nationwide

AI Tool

  • → AI Legal Writing Tool
  • → AI Document Drafting
  • → Motion Drafting
  • → Contract Drafting
  • → Legal Research
  • → Case Law Search
  • → Citation Generator
  • → Document Review
  • → Contract Review
  • → For Lawyers

Writing Service

  • → Eviction Defense
  • → Court Documents
  • → Custody & Family
  • → Divorce Documents
  • → Debt & Collections
  • → All Writing Services

Top Guides

  • → Eviction Response Guide
  • → Best AI Legal Tools 2026
  • → Debt Validation Letter Guide

Company

  • → About The Law Lion
  • → Client Results
  • → Transparent Pricing
  • → Legal Guides & Blog
  • → Contact & Free Consult
  • → Affiliate Program

Top Services

  • → Eviction Notice Response
  • → Debt Validation Letter
  • → Court Summons Response
© 2026 The Law Lion LLC · AI Legal Writing & Expert Document Service
Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceSitemap