People v. Benton

31 A.D.3d 1063, 818 N.Y.S.2d 497
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 27, 2006
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 31 A.D.3d 1063 (People v. Benton) 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. Benton, 31 A.D.3d 1063, 818 N.Y.S.2d 497 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

Crew III, J.P.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Tompkins County (Sherman, J.), rendered November 4, 2002, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (four counts).

Pursuant to a written plea memorandum, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree and four counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was sentenced, pursuant to the agreement, to an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment of SVs years to life for the possession charge and 1 to 3 years for each of the sale charges, all sentences to run concurrently. Defendant now appeals.

Defendant failed to move to withdraw his plea or vacate his judgment of conviction and, thus, his challenge to the sufficiency of his plea has not been preserved for our review (see People v Santalucia, 19 AD3d 806, 807 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 856 [2005]). Nevertheless, were we to consider defendant’s challenge, we would find it to be without merit.

To the extent that defendant seeks resentencing pursuant to the provisions of Penal Law § 70.71, we need note only that such relief must be sought in the court that imposed the original sentence (see L 2005, ch 643, § 1). Finally, we have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them to be lacking in merit.

Feters, Spain, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

People v. Sanabria
43 A.D.3d 1228 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
31 A.D.3d 1063, 818 N.Y.S.2d 497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-benton-nyappdiv-2006.