People v. Diaz

26 A.D.3d 768, 809 N.Y.S.2d 924
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 3, 2006·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (Frederick G. Reed, J.), rendered August 1, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (three counts).

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that County Court erred in sentencing him without the benefit of an adequate presentence report (see People v Villafane, 294 AD2d 117 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 682 [2002]; People v Gugliara, 137 AD2d 766 [1988]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Gorski, Green and Hayes, JJ.

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

People v. Diaz, 26 A.D.3d 768, 809 N.Y.S.2d 924 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

26 A.D.3d 768 (People v. Diaz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

FRAZIER, CHAZ D., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012
People v. Frazier
91 A.D.3d 1319 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
KITHCART, EDWARD, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011
People v. Kithcart
85 A.D.3d 1558 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Finley
42 A.D.3d 917 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)