People v. Farrar

2021 NY Slip Op 07554, 200 A.D.3d 1068, 155 N.Y.S.3d 797
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 29, 2021
Docket2018-10771
StatusPublished

This text of 2021 NY Slip Op 07554 (People v. Farrar) 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. Farrar, 2021 NY Slip Op 07554, 200 A.D.3d 1068, 155 N.Y.S.3d 797 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

People v Farrar (2021 NY Slip Op 07554)
People v Farrar
2021 NY Slip Op 07554
Decided on December 29, 2021
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on December 29, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
JOSEPH J. MALTESE, J.P.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY
ANGELA G. IANNACCI
WILLIAM G. FORD, JJ.

2018-10771
(S.C.I. No. 1608/18)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Shawn Farrar, appellant.


Janet E. Sabel, New York, NY (Kristina Schwarz of counsel), for appellant.

Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill, Sharon Y. Brodt, and Russell Shapiro of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Danielle Hartman, J., at plea; Gia Morris, J., at sentence), rendered July 30, 2018, convicting him of attempted criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, he is not entitled to vacatur of his conviction and dismissal of the accusatory instrument based upon the sentencing court's error in pronouncing the sentence (see People v Sparber, 10 NY3d 457, 471-472; People v Sturgis, 69 NY2d 816, 818). Since the defendant is not entitled to the only remedy he seeks on this appeal, we affirm the judgment.

MALTESE, J.P., DUFFY, IANNACCI and FORD, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Maria T. Fasulo

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Sparber
889 N.E.2d 459 (New York Court of Appeals, 2008)
People v. Sturgis
506 N.E.2d 532 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2021 NY Slip Op 07554, 200 A.D.3d 1068, 155 N.Y.S.3d 797, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-farrar-nyappdiv-2021.