Opinion
2017–05559 Ind.No. 12–00899
06-05-2019
The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Exander ROSADO, Appellant.
Lisa H. Blitman, New York, NY, for appellant. Anthony A. Scarpino, Jr., District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (William C. Milaccio and Jennifer Spencer of counsel), for respondent.
Lisa H. Blitman, New York, NY, for appellant.
Anthony A. Scarpino, Jr., District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (William C. Milaccio and Jennifer Spencer of counsel), for respondent.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, ROBERT J. MILLER, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
ORDERED that the resentence is affirmed.
The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining to adjudicate the defendant a youthful offender. Since the defendant was convicted of an armed felony, he was eligible to have that conviction replaced with a youthful offender adjudication only if there were "mitigating circumstances that [bore] directly upon the manner in which the crime was committed" or, since the defendant was not the sole participant in the crime, if his participation was "relatively minor" ( CPL 720.10[3] ; see CPL 720.10[2][a] ; People v. Mackson , 154 A.D.3d 780, 781, 61 N.Y.S.3d 508 ). Here, there were insufficient mitigating circumstances bearing directly upon the manner in which the crime was committed, and the defendant's participation in the crime was not relatively minor (see People v. D.M. , 168 A.D.3d 879, 89 N.Y.S.3d 906 ; People v. Mackson , 154 A.D.3d at 781, 61 N.Y.S.3d 508 ; People v. Keith , 144 A.D.3d 705, 706, 39 N.Y.S.3d 808 ).
MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, MILLER and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.