People v. Bushati

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bushati

246 A.D.2d 663, 666 N.Y.S.2d 953, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 580

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 246 A.D.2d 663 (People v. Bushati) 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. Bushati, 246 A.D.2d 663, 666 N.Y.S.2d 953, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 580 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.), rendered June 17, 1996, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

[664]*664Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

As the defendant failed to object to the procedure utilized by the court in determining the amount of restitution, his challenge on appeal is not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 281). In any event, the court did not err in imposing restitution without conducting a hearing. The amount of restitution ordered was a condition of the defendant’s plea of guilty (see, People v Brown, 224 AD2d 437, 438), and the defendant agreed to the amount at the plea allocution (see, People v Ali, 233 AD2d 517).

The defendant’s remaining contention, that his sentence was otherwise excessive, is without merit, as he was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Mangano, P. J., Copertino, Joy, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.), rendered June 17, 1996, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

[664]*664Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

As the defendant failed to object to the procedure utilized by the court in determining the amount of restitution, his challenge on appeal is not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 281). In any event, the court did not err in imposing restitution without conducting a hearing. The amount of restitution ordered was a condition of the defendant’s plea of guilty (see, People v Brown, 224 AD2d 437, 438), and the defendant agreed to the amount at the plea allocution (see, People v Ali, 233 AD2d 517).

The defendant’s remaining contention, that his sentence was otherwise excessive, is without merit, as he was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Mangano, P. J., Copertino, Joy, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D.2d 663, 666 N.Y.S.2d 953, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 580, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bushati-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack