People v. Wilson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Wilson

28 A.D.3d 796, 812 N.Y.S.2d 883

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 25, 2006·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.), rendered April 15, 2004, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

“The defendant’s valid and unrestricted waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his claim that the sentence [797] was excessive” (People v Clancy, 24 AD3d 686 [2005]; see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248 [2006]; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]; People v Jones, 21 AD3d 968 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 754 [2005]).

In any event, “[s]ince defendant received the minimum sentence permitted by law, this Court has no authority to reduce it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice” (People v Utsey, 22 AD3d 268 [2005]; see CPL 470.20 [6]; People v Thompson, 60 NY2d 513 [1983]; People v Muller, 294 AD2d 602 [2002]). Schmidt, J.P., Adams, Santucci and Skelos, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.), rendered April 15, 2004, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

“The defendant’s valid and unrestricted waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his claim that the sentence [797] was excessive” (People v Clancy, 24 AD3d 686 [2005]; see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248 [2006]; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]; People v Jones, 21 AD3d 968 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 754 [2005]).

In any event, “[s]ince defendant received the minimum sentence permitted by law, this Court has no authority to reduce it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice” (People v Utsey, 22 AD3d 268 [2005]; see CPL 470.20 [6]; People v Thompson, 60 NY2d 513 [1983]; People v Muller, 294 AD2d 602 [2002]). Schmidt, J.P., Adams, Santucci and Skelos, JJ., concur.

People v. Wilson, 28 A.D.3d 796, 812 N.Y.S.2d 883 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

28 A.D.3d 796 (People v. Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related