People v. Jost

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jost

141 A.D.3d 1116, 33 N.Y.S.3d 798

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

DecidedJuly 1, 2016

StatusPublished

This text of 141 A.D.3d 1116 (People v. Jost) 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. Jost, 141 A.D.3d 1116, 33 N.Y.S.3d 798 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a judgment of the Orleans County Court (James P. Punch, J.), rendered June 30, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of disseminating indecent materials to minors in the first degree.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of disseminating indecent materials to minors in the first degree (Penal Law § 235.22). We conclude that County Court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to grant defendant youthful offender status (see People v Jackson, 126 AD3d 1508, 1511-1512 [2015]). In addition, under the circumstances of this case, including defendant’s prior adjudication for similar conduct, we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to adjudicate defendant a youthful offender (see e.g. People v Potter, 13 AD3d 1191, 1191 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 889 [2005]; cf. People v Shrubsall, 167 AD2d 929, 929-931 [1990]). Finally, we reject defendant’s contention that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe.

Present — Peradotto, J.P., Carni, Curran, Troutman and Scudder, JJ.

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

— Appeal from a judgment of the Orleans County Court (James P. Punch, J.), rendered June 30, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of disseminating indecent materials to minors in the first degree.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of disseminating indecent materials to minors in the first degree (Penal Law § 235.22). We conclude that County Court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to grant defendant youthful offender status (see People v Jackson, 126 AD3d 1508, 1511-1512 [2015]). In addition, under the circumstances of this case, including defendant’s prior adjudication for similar conduct, we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to adjudicate defendant a youthful offender (see e.g. People v Potter, 13 AD3d 1191, 1191 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 889 [2005]; cf. People v Shrubsall, 167 AD2d 929, 929-931 [1990]). Finally, we reject defendant’s contention that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe.

Present — Peradotto, J.P., Carni, Curran, Troutman and Scudder, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

141 A.D.3d 1116, 33 N.Y.S.3d 798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jost-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack