People v. Mullen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mullen

24 A.D.3d 1251, 805 N.Y.S.2d 893

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

DecidedDecember 22, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.3d 1251 (People v. Mullen) 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. Mullen, 24 A.D.3d 1251, 805 N.Y.S.2d 893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered August 3, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of sexual abuse in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65 [3]), defendant contends that County Court abused its discretion in denying his application [1252]*1252for youthful offender status. Defendant failed to preserve his contention for our review (see People v Jones, 288 AD2d 397 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 730 [2002]; People v Gonzalez [appeal No. 1], 280 AD2d 980 [2001]) and, in any event, defendant’s contention lacks merit (see generally People v Henderson, 300 AD2d 1119 [2002], lv denied 100 NY2d 539 [2003]; People v Smith, 286 AD2d 878 [2001], lv denied 98 NY2d 641 [2002]). Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Scudder, Gorski, Martoche and Smith, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered August 3, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of sexual abuse in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65 [3]), defendant contends that County Court abused its discretion in denying his application [1252]*1252for youthful offender status. Defendant failed to preserve his contention for our review (see People v Jones, 288 AD2d 397 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 730 [2002]; People v Gonzalez [appeal No. 1], 280 AD2d 980 [2001]) and, in any event, defendant’s contention lacks merit (see generally People v Henderson, 300 AD2d 1119 [2002], lv denied 100 NY2d 539 [2003]; People v Smith, 286 AD2d 878 [2001], lv denied 98 NY2d 641 [2002]). Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Scudder, Gorski, Martoche and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.3d 1251, 805 N.Y.S.2d 893, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mullen-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack