People v. Blanco

2016 NY Slip Op 6975, 143 A.D.3d 616, 39 N.Y.S.3d 760
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Blanco. Read the opinion of the Court — 156 A.D.3d 945
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 25, 2016·No. 2034 4295/10 1051/11·Published

Opinion

Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berk-man, J.), rendered May 11, 2011, as amended May 31, 2011, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of assault in the second degree and attempted robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of two years, unanimously affirmed.

Although it is undisputed that defendant was entitled to an express youthful offender (YO) determination at sentencing {see People v Rudolph, 21 NY3d 497 [2013]), defendant does not request a remand for that purpose, but instead asks this court to grant YO treatment as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice. However, we find that YO treatment would be inappropriate. As for the first conviction, defendant violated the conditions of his plea (see e.g. People v Stoudymire, 91 AD3d 543 [1st Dept 2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 867 [2012]), and the second conviction involved the commission of a new felony while sentencing had been deferred on the prior felony. Moreover, both convictions were for violent felonies.

Concur— Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Saxe, Feinman and Kahn, JJ.

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

People v. Blanco, 2016 NY Slip Op 6975, 143 A.D.3d 616, 39 N.Y.S.3d 760 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

2016 NY Slip Op 6975 (People v. Blanco) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Rudolph
997 N.E.2d 457 (New York Court of Appeals, 2013)
People v. Stoudymire
91 A.D.3d 543 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)