People v. Robbins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Robbins

117 A.D.3d 595, 986 N.Y.S.2d 113

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

DecidedMay 22, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 117 A.D.3d 595 (People v. Robbins) 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. Robbins, 117 A.D.3d 595, 986 N.Y.S.2d 113 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

[596]*596Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berk-man, J.), rendered June 21, 2012, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 15 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence to a term of 10 years, and otherwise affirmed.

The court properly declined to sentence defendant as a youthful offender. Because defendant was convicted of an armed felony, he was not eligible for youthful offender treatment without a showing of specified mitigating factors (CPL 720.10 [2] [a] [ii]; [3]), and the record does not establish such mitigation. Defendant played an important role in a series of violent crimes, and the fact that his codefendant’s conduct was even more heinous did not render defendant’s participation so “minor” (CPL 720.10 [3] [ii]) as to render him eligible for youthful offender treatment, which was not warranted in any event. However, we find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated.

Concur—Renwick, J.P, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman and Gische, JJ.

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

[596]*596Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berk-man, J.), rendered June 21, 2012, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of 15 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence to a term of 10 years, and otherwise affirmed.

The court properly declined to sentence defendant as a youthful offender. Because defendant was convicted of an armed felony, he was not eligible for youthful offender treatment without a showing of specified mitigating factors (CPL 720.10 [2] [a] [ii]; [3]), and the record does not establish such mitigation. Defendant played an important role in a series of violent crimes, and the fact that his codefendant’s conduct was even more heinous did not render defendant’s participation so “minor” (CPL 720.10 [3] [ii]) as to render him eligible for youthful offender treatment, which was not warranted in any event. However, we find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated.

Concur—Renwick, J.P, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman and Gische, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 A.D.3d 595, 986 N.Y.S.2d 113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-robbins-nyappdiv-2014.