Opinion
2014-05-21
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Julian THOMAS, appellant.
Hammock & Sullivan, Flushing, N.Y. (Edward R. Hammock of counsel), for appellant. Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Linda Breen, and Danit Almog of counsel), for respondent.
Hammock & Sullivan, Flushing, N.Y. (Edward R. Hammock of counsel), for appellant. Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Linda Breen, and Danit Almog of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.), imposed August 2, 2012, upon his conviction of manslaughter in the second degree, upon a jury verdict.
ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the prosecutor made improper remarks during sentencing is unpreserved for appellate review ( seeCPL 470.05[2] ) and, in any event, without merit. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the sentencing court properly considered the objectives of sentencing and the court's comments “ ‘merely reflect the fact that the court was taking into consideration the nature of the crime, a legitimate factor in determining an appropriate sentence’ ” ( People v. Anderson, 287 A.D.2d 574, 731 N.Y.S.2d 495, quoting People v. James, 216 A.D.2d 489, 489, 628 N.Y.S.2d 548). Furthermore, the sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675). DICKERSON, J.P., LEVENTHAL, HALL and LOTT, JJ., concur.