People v. McLellan

82 A.D.3d 1668, 919 N.Y.2d 447
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 25, 2011·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

[1669]*1669Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of two counts of criminal sexual act in the second degree (Penal Law § 130.45 [1]). Although, as the People correctly concede, defendant’s challenge to the legality of the sentence survives his waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Christopher T., 48 AD3d 1131 [2008]), we reject defendant’s contention that the imposition of consecutive sentences was illegal. The facts and circumstances that defendant admitted during the plea allocution establish that he committed two separate and distinct acts of oral sexual conduct that formed the basis for the two counts of criminal sexual act to which he pleaded guilty. Thus, County Court was authorized to impose consecutive sentences (see People v Quirk, 73 AD3d 1089 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 955 [2010]; see generally People v Laureano, 87 NY2d 640, 643-644 [1996]). Present — Scudder, RJ., Centra, Sconiers, Gorski and Martoche, JJ.

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

People v. McLellan, 82 A.D.3d 1668, 919 N.Y.2d 447 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

82 A.D.3d 1668 (People v. McLellan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Stevenson
2019 NY Slip Op 8085 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
BUSSOM, BRIAN R., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015
People v. Bussom
125 A.D.3d 1331 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)