From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Anonymous

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 3, 2006
33 A.D.3d 336 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

No. 9075.

October 3, 2006.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael A. Corriero, J.), entered on or about June 9, 2005, which specified and informed defendant that the court would resentence defendant to a term of 10 years for his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first degree, unanimously affirmed, and the matter remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings upon defendant's application for resentencing.

Before: Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Williams, Catterson and Malone, JJ.


The applicable section of the Drug Law Reform Act (L 2004, ch 738, § 23) permits a defendant to appeal, on the ground of exeessiveness, from a court's order specifying its intended resentence. We perceive no basis for reducing the proposed sentence. The record fails to support defendant's contention that the resentencing court erroneously penalized him twice for the same violation of a 2003 cooperation agreement that led to his initial A-I felony conviction and his sentence of 15 years to life. In proposing a resentence that was two years more than the minimum permissible sentence, the court appropriately considered various factors including the quantity of drugs that were involved and the extent of defendant's criminal conduct.


Summaries of

People v. Anonymous

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 3, 2006
33 A.D.3d 336 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

People v. Anonymous

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANONYMOUS, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 3, 2006

Citations

33 A.D.3d 336 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 7126
821 N.Y.S.2d 456

Citing Cases

People v. Rakeese

Turning to the merits, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in determining that it would…

People v. Kearse

We reject defendant's contention that the proposed new sentence is harsh and excessive. The court upon…