People v. Castillo

63 A.D.3d 641, 880 N.Y.S.2d 862
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Castillo. Read the opinion of the Court — 34 A.D.3d 221

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), entered on [642]*642or about June 5, 2007, which denied defendant’s motion to be resentenced under the Drug Law Reform Act of 2004, unanimously affirmed.

There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determination that substantial justice dictated denial of resentencing. The court properly concluded that the seriousness of the underlying crime outweighed defendant’s efforts at rehabilitation and the other mitigating factors he cited (see e.g. People v Franco, 55 AD3d 319, 320 [2008], lv dismissed 11 NY3d 854 [2008]; People v Marte, 44 AD3d 442 [2007], lv dismissed 9 NY3d 991 [2007]). The record does not establish that the denial of resentencing was based on any inappropriate criteria. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Saxe, Catterson, DeGrasse and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

People v. Castillo, 63 A.D.3d 641, 880 N.Y.S.2d 862 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

63 A.D.3d 641 (People v. Castillo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Marte
44 A.D.3d 442 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Franco
55 A.D.3d 319 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)