People v. Yomtov

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Yomtov

19 A.D.3d 147, 796 N.Y.S.2d 348

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

DecidedJune 7, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 19 A.D.3d 147 (People v. Yomtov) 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. Yomtov, 19 A.D.3d 147, 796 N.Y.S.2d 348 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Budd G. Goodman, J.), rendered January 15, 2004, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of six years, unanimously affirmed.

The sentencing proceedings were fair and did not violate any of defendant’s constitutional or statutory rights (see People v Perry, 36 NY2d 114, 119 [1975]). Under the plea agreement, defendant’s sentence would fall between five years (the statutory minimum) and seven years. In connection with sentencing, defendant submitted approximately 50 pages of material, including four mental health evaluations, and made lengthy oral presentations. Defendant’s sentence did not turn on any factual disputes requiring further exploration. Under these circumstances, the court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s requests for a presentence conference, and to call witnesses and subpoena records (see CEL 400.10). The court properly permitted the victim’s mother to make a statement at sentencing (see CEL 380.50 [2] [a] [2]), and there was no violation of defendant’s right to rebut such statement (see CEL 380.50 [2] [e]). The record fails to support defendant’s claims of judicial bias and impropriety.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Ellerin, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Budd G. Goodman, J.), rendered January 15, 2004, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, and sentencing him to a term of six years, unanimously affirmed.

The sentencing proceedings were fair and did not violate any of defendant’s constitutional or statutory rights (see People v Perry, 36 NY2d 114, 119 [1975]). Under the plea agreement, defendant’s sentence would fall between five years (the statutory minimum) and seven years. In connection with sentencing, defendant submitted approximately 50 pages of material, including four mental health evaluations, and made lengthy oral presentations. Defendant’s sentence did not turn on any factual disputes requiring further exploration. Under these circumstances, the court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s requests for a presentence conference, and to call witnesses and subpoena records (see CEL 400.10). The court properly permitted the victim’s mother to make a statement at sentencing (see CEL 380.50 [2] [a] [2]), and there was no violation of defendant’s right to rebut such statement (see CEL 380.50 [2] [e]). The record fails to support defendant’s claims of judicial bias and impropriety.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Ellerin, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.3d 147, 796 N.Y.S.2d 348, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-yomtov-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack