People v. Beaty

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Beaty

280 A.D.2d 439, 721 N.Y.S.2d 507, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1949

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 27, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 280 A.D.2d 439 (People v. Beaty) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Beaty, 280 A.D.2d 439, 721 N.Y.S.2d 507, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1949 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Solomon, J.), rendered July 3, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the third degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a persistent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in sentencing defendant as a persistent felony offender. The record supports the court’s finding that “the history and character of the defendant and the nature and circumstances of his criminal conduct indicate that extended incarceration and life-time supervision will best serve the public interest” (Penal Law § 70.10 [2]).

The record establishes that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714).

Defendant’s remaining contentions, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief, are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to [440]*440review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Tom, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Solomon, J.), rendered July 3, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the third degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a persistent felony offender, to concurrent terms of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in sentencing defendant as a persistent felony offender. The record supports the court’s finding that “the history and character of the defendant and the nature and circumstances of his criminal conduct indicate that extended incarceration and life-time supervision will best serve the public interest” (Penal Law § 70.10 [2]).

The record establishes that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714).

Defendant’s remaining contentions, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief, are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to [440]*440review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Tom, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

280 A.D.2d 439, 721 N.Y.S.2d 507, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1949, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-beaty-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack