From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Emmanus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 16, 2002
300 A.D.2d 504 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2000-04301

Argued November 25, 2002.

December 16, 2002.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (J. Goldberg, J.), rendered May 4, 2000, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Andrew C. Fine, New York, N.Y., and White Case, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Alycia Regan Benenati and Kara Headley of counsel) for appellant (one brief filed).

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Anne C. Feigus, and Natalie Holme of counsel), for respondent.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, THOMAS A. ADAMS, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the sentencing court improperly considered charges of which he was acquitted as a basis for imposing sentence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05), and, in any event, is without merit (see People v. Robinson, 250 A.D.2d 629; see also People v. Hall, 46 N.Y.2d 873, 875, cert denied 444 U.S. 848).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Emmanus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 16, 2002
300 A.D.2d 504 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Emmanus

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. SHERWAYNE EMMANUS, appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 16, 2002

Citations

300 A.D.2d 504 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
750 N.Y.S.2d 889

Citing Cases

People v. Shahumyan

The defendant's contention that the sentencing court improperly considered charges of which he was acquitted…

People v. Ponder

The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court improperly considered a charge of which he was acquitted as…