Opinion
2021-06290
11-12-2021
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. MAURICE MARTIN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (TYLER B. BUGDEN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (KENNETH H. TYLER, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (TYLER B. BUGDEN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (KENNETH H. TYLER, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: CARNI, J.P., LINDLEY, NEMOYER, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Matthew J. Doran, J.), rendered February 3, 2020. The judgment convicted defendant upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]). Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal is invalid and thus does not preclude our review of defendant's challenge to County Court's refusal to grant him youthful offender status, we nevertheless affirm the judgment. Contrary to defendant's contention, the court did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant him youthful offender status (see People v McCall, 177 A.D.3d 1395, 1396 [4th Dept 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 1130 [2020]; People v Rice, 175 A.D.3d 1826, 1826 [4th Dept 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 1132 [2020]), particularly in light of the nature of the offense and the manner in which it was committed (see People v Lester, 167 A.D.3d 1559, 1560 [4th Dept 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 1206 [2019]; People v Ford, 144 A.D.3d 1682, 1683 [4th Dept 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 1184 [2017]), and we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to adjudicate defendant a youthful offender (see People v Chambers, 176 A.D.3d 1600, 1600-1601 [4th Dept 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 1076 [2019]; cf. People v Keith B.J., 158 A.D.3d 1160, 1160-1161 [4th Dept 2018]).