Search for: "Van Pelt v. People"
Results 1 - 4
of 4
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Sep 2010, 7:23 pm
When an appellant successfully challenges a conviction which followed a trial, the imposition of an increased sentence after a retrial is presumed to violate the Due Process Clause of the New York State Constitution, even where the retrial is before a different judge than imposed the original sentence (People v Van Pelt, 76 NY2d 156, 158 [1990]). [read post]
17 Nov 2008, 8:32 pm
The Court held that"The threshold issue in evaluating whether a resentence is vindictive is whether the resentence is more severe than that originally imposed" (People v Cahill, 46 AD3d 1455, 1456; see generally People v Young, 94 NY2d 171, 176-177, rearg denied 94 NY2d 876; People v Van Pelt, 76 NY2d 156, 159-160), and a determinate sentence of 25 years is of course more severe than one of 20 years. [read post]
9 Mar 2014, 7:52 am
Core Wireless Licensing, S.A.R.L. v. [read post]
31 Dec 2017, 5:19 pm
In 2006, Ray Pennings and Michael Van Pelt of Cardus think tank published a piece in Policy Options which stated that the previous governing party reflected an emerging Canadian polity that transcends “the current reality of Canadian diversity” that reflected “an aggressive rights-based polity that identifies with tolerance over definition. [read post]
