People v. Brock
This text of 69 A.D.3d 644 (People v. Brock) 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.
Opinion
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review her contention that the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court improperly penalized her for exercising her right to a jury trial, because she did not set forth the issue on the record at the time of sentencing (see People v Hurley, 75 NY2d 887, 888 [1990]; People v Herrera, 16 AD3d 699, 700 [2005]). In any event, the fact that the sentence imposed after trial was' greater than the sentence offered during plea negotiations is no indication that the defendant was punished for asserting her right to proceed to trial (see People v Pena, 50 NY2d 400, 411-412 [1980], cert denied 449 US 1087 [1981]; People v Garcia, 66 AD3d 699 [2009]). Moreover, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD 2d 80 [1982]). Covello, J.R, Santucci, Chambers and Hall, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
69 A.D.3d 644, 891 N.Y.2d 292, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-brock-nyappdiv-2010.