People v. Naumann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Naumann

131 A.D.2d 705, 517 N.Y.S.2d 34, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48164

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

DecidedJune 15, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 131 A.D.2d 705 (People v. Naumann) 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. Naumann, 131 A.D.2d 705, 517 N.Y.S.2d 34, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48164 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from so much of a sentence of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (D’Amaro, J.), imposed March 13, 1986, upon his conviction of burglary in the second degree, after a plea of guilty, as, in addition to imposing an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 4 to 8 years, directed the payment of $100 as a mandatory surcharge.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed insofar as appealed from.

The sentence, including the imposition of the mandatory [706]*706felony surcharge, was neither unduly harsh nor excessive. In addition, at the time of sentencing, the defendant did not challenge the imposition of the mandatory felony surcharge on the grounds that it was unconstitutional or that it should have been waived based upon his alleged indigency. Accordingly, these contentions are not preserved for review as a matter of law (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Baker, 130 AD2d 582), and we decline to address them in the interest of justice. Lawrence, J. P., Weinstein, Rubin and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from so much of a sentence of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (D’Amaro, J.), imposed March 13, 1986, upon his conviction of burglary in the second degree, after a plea of guilty, as, in addition to imposing an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 4 to 8 years, directed the payment of $100 as a mandatory surcharge.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed insofar as appealed from.

The sentence, including the imposition of the mandatory [706]*706felony surcharge, was neither unduly harsh nor excessive. In addition, at the time of sentencing, the defendant did not challenge the imposition of the mandatory felony surcharge on the grounds that it was unconstitutional or that it should have been waived based upon his alleged indigency. Accordingly, these contentions are not preserved for review as a matter of law (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Baker, 130 AD2d 582), and we decline to address them in the interest of justice. Lawrence, J. P., Weinstein, Rubin and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 A.D.2d 705, 517 N.Y.S.2d 34, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-naumann-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack