People v. Marshall

68 A.D.3d 1014, 889 N.Y.2d 862
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 15, 2009·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[1015]*1015Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the sentence was not excessive merely because the sentencing court considered the defendant’s prior youthful offender adjudication at the time of sentencing. “ Tt is well established that in reaching a sentencing determination, the court may consider not only prior offenses for which the defendant was convicted, but even offenses for which he had not been convicted’ ” (People v Whitehead, 46 AD3d 715, 716 [2007], quoting People v Khan, 146 AD2d 806, 807 [1989]; People v Gonzalez, 242 AD2d 306, 307 [1997]).

There is no merit to the defendant’s contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at sentencing (see Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]). Rivera, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo, Leventhal and Roman, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Marshall, 68 A.D.3d 1014, 889 N.Y.2d 862 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

68 A.D.3d 1014 (People v. Marshall) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Chavies
2020 NY Slip Op 07910 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)