From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cosby

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 12, 2017
154 A.D.3d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

10-12-2017

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Tremaine COSBY, Defendant–Appellant.

Feldman and Feldman, Uniondale (Steven A. Feldman of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Amanda Katherine Regan of counsel), for respondent.


Feldman and Feldman, Uniondale (Steven A. Feldman of counsel), for appellant.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Amanda Katherine Regan of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.) rendered November 19, 2013 convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of attempted murder in the second degree (two counts) and conspiracy in the second degree, and purportedly imposing sentence, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of remanding for pronouncement of sentence on each count of both indictments on the record, and otherwise affirmed.

As the People concede, although there was discussion on the record of the sentences the court intended to impose, the court never formally imposed sentence in accordance with CPL 380.20. Accordingly, the matter is remanded for the sole purpose of pronouncing defendant's sentence on the record (see e.g. People v. Espinal, 234 A.D.2d 84, 650 N.Y.S.2d 694 [1996], lv. denied 89 N.Y.2d 1092, 660 N.Y.S.2d 385, 682 N.E.2d 986 [1997] ).

MANZANET–DANIELS, J.P., MAZZARELLI, WEBBER, OING, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Cosby

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 12, 2017
154 A.D.3d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

People v. Cosby

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Tremaine COSBY…

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

Date published: Oct 12, 2017

Citations

154 A.D.3d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
154 A.D.3d 505

Citing Cases

Brims v. Collado

[Dkt. 16-4 at 39.] Petitioner's claim became fully exhausted when the Appellate Division held that Petitioner…