From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Certain

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jul 17, 2013
108 A.D.3d 681 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-07-17

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Sharod CERTAIN, appellant.

Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Alfred J. Cicale of counsel), for appellant. Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Karla Lato of counsel), for respondent.


Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Alfred J. Cicale of counsel), for appellant. Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Karla Lato of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), rendered December 4, 2009, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in denying him youthful offender treatment ( see People v. Morrow, 84 A.D.3d 1412, 1413, 924 N.Y.S.2d 289;People v. Johnson, 220 A.D.2d 775, 776, 633 N.Y.S.2d 195).

RIVERA, J.P., DICKERSON, LEVENTHAL and LOTT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Certain

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jul 17, 2013
108 A.D.3d 681 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

People v. Certain

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Sharod CERTAIN, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Jul 17, 2013

Citations

108 A.D.3d 681 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 5327
968 N.Y.S.2d 400

Citing Cases

People v. Dawkins

" ‘The determination of whether to grant or deny youthful offender status rests within the sound discretion…

People v. Dawkins

Here, contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in…