From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wallace

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 26, 1998
246 A.D.2d 676 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

January 26, 1998

Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Cacciabaudo, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from.

Mere eligibility for youthful offender status does not mandate youthful offender treatment. The decision to grant such treatment lies wholly within the discretion of the court (see, CPL 720.20; People v. Vera, 206 A.D.2d 494; People v. Barr, 168 A.D.2d 625). On this record, the court's determination to deny youthful offender treatment to the defendant was not an improvident exercise of discretion.

We note that because the defendant's notice of appeal limited the instant appeal to "denial of youthful offender status only" (emphasis in the original), we may not reach any other issue ( see, City of Mount Vernon v. Mount Vernon Hous. Auth., 235 A.D.2d 516; W.J.F. Realty Corp. v. Town of Southampton, 240 A.D.2d 657; Royal v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., 122 A.D.2d 132, 133).

Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Santucci and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Wallace

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 26, 1998
246 A.D.2d 676 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Wallace

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MARTONEZ WALLACE…

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

Date published: Jan 26, 1998

Citations

246 A.D.2d 676 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
666 N.Y.S.2d 961

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

Defendant's notice of appeal explicitly states that it is limited to the sentence imposed on the ground that…

People v. Williams

The decision to grant such treatment lies wholly within the discretion of the sentencing court (see, CPL…