People v. Livingston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Livingston

96 A.D.3d 688, 946 N.Y.S.2d 865

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

DecidedJune 28, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 96 A.D.3d 688 (People v. Livingston) 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. Livingston, 96 A.D.3d 688, 946 N.Y.S.2d 865 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael R. Sonberg, J.), rendered April 27, 2010, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third and fourth degrees, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of JVs years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant failed to preserve, and expressly waived, his claim that the court improperly enhanced his negotiated sentence, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. The court offered to conduct a hearing on the issue of whether defendant violated a term of the plea agreement, but defendant declined that offer. Instead, defendant withdrew his challenge to the imposition of additional prison time and accepted the court’s six-month enhancement of the promised sentence.

As an alternative holding, we reject defendant’s claim on the merits. The record supports the court’s finding that defendant violated a plea condition requiring him to be truthful with the Department of Probation concerning the underlying facts of the [689]*689crimes to which he pleaded guilty (see People v Hicks, 98 NY2d 185, 189 [2002]).

We perceive no other basis for reducing the enhanced sentence. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Catterson, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels and Román, JJ.

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

Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael R. Sonberg, J.), rendered April 27, 2010, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third and fourth degrees, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of JVs years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant failed to preserve, and expressly waived, his claim that the court improperly enhanced his negotiated sentence, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. The court offered to conduct a hearing on the issue of whether defendant violated a term of the plea agreement, but defendant declined that offer. Instead, defendant withdrew his challenge to the imposition of additional prison time and accepted the court’s six-month enhancement of the promised sentence.

As an alternative holding, we reject defendant’s claim on the merits. The record supports the court’s finding that defendant violated a plea condition requiring him to be truthful with the Department of Probation concerning the underlying facts of the [689]*689crimes to which he pleaded guilty (see People v Hicks, 98 NY2d 185, 189 [2002]).

We perceive no other basis for reducing the enhanced sentence. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Catterson, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels and Román, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 A.D.3d 688, 946 N.Y.S.2d 865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-livingston-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack