People v. Narmetov

2025 NY Slip Op 07315
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 24, 2025
DocketInd. No. 72783/21
StatusPublished

This text of 2025 NY Slip Op 07315 (People v. Narmetov) 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. Narmetov, 2025 NY Slip Op 07315 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

People v Narmetov (2025 NY Slip Op 07315)
People v Narmetov
2025 NY Slip Op 07315
Decided on December 24, 2025
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on December 24, 2025 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P.
DEBORAH A. DOWLING
LILLIAN WAN
ELENA GOLDBERG VELAZQUEZ, JJ.

2023-06150
(Ind. No. 72783/21)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Timur Narmetov, appellant.


Twyla Carter, New York, NY (Mary-Kathryn Smith of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove, Morgan J. Dennehy, and Richard Helms of counsel; Ruth Reid on the brief), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Donald Leo, J.), rendered June 26, 2023, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Brisman, 43 NY3d 322, 324; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant's challenge to the duration of the order of protection issued at the time of sentencing is unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not raise this issue at sentencing or move to amend the order of protection on this ground (see People v Crosby, 230 AD3d 597, 598; People v Holmes, 206 AD3d 761, 762). Under the circumstances, we decline to reach this contention in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see CPL 470.15[6][a]; People v Argudo, 232 AD3d 907, 908). "[T]he better practice—and best use of judicial resources—is for a defendant seeking adjustment of . . . an order [of protection] to request relief from the issuing court in the first instance, resorting to the appellate courts only if necessary" (People v Nieves, 2 NY3d 310, 317; see People v Lloyd-Douglas, 208 AD3d 520, 522).

CHAMBERS, J.P., DOWLING, WAN and GOLDBERG VELAZQUEZ, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Nieves
811 N.E.2d 13 (New York Court of Appeals, 2004)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
People v. Lloyd-Douglas
208 A.D.3d 520 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Brisman
43 N.Y.3d 322 (New York Court of Appeals, 2025)
People v. Narmetov
2025 NY Slip Op 07315 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 NY Slip Op 07315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-narmetov-nyappdiv-2025.