From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Johnson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 24, 2008
52 A.D.3d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 4001.

June 24, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene R. Silverman, J.), entered on or about May 22, 2007, which denied defendant's CPL 440.20 motion to set aside his sentence, unanimously affirmed.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Claudia S. Trupp of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Vincent Rivellese of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Lippman, P.J., Tom, Gonzalez, Buckley and Catterson, JJ.


Defendant has not established that his sentence was "unauthorized, illegally imposed or otherwise invalid as a matter of law" (CPL 440.20). Most of defendant's present claims are identical to claims that this Court has already rejected on his direct appeal ( 51 AD3d 508). We find those claims to be barred by the doctrine of res judicata ( see People v Walker, 265 AD2d 254, lv denied 94 NY2d 908), and without merit in any event. To the extent that defendant raises additional challenges to his sentence, we likewise find them without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Johnson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 24, 2008
52 A.D.3d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

People v. Johnson

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Jun 24, 2008

Citations

52 A.D.3d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 5756
859 N.Y.S.2d 367

Citing Cases

People v. Casada

Defendant, however, does not elaborate upon his 440.20 claim and has failed to demonstrate that the sentence…

People v. Casada

Defendant, however, does not elaborate upon his 440.20 claim and has failed to demonstrate that the sentence…