From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Arana

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 8, 2007
45 A.D.3d 311 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

Nos. 1914, 8645/88.

November 8, 2007.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), entered on or about December 5, 2006, which denied defendant's motion to be resentenced pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Act, unanimously affirmed.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Carl S. Kaplan of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Tracy L. Conn of counsel), for respondent

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Catterson and Kavanagh, JJ.


Following our remand ( 32 AD3d 305), the court properly determined that "substantial justice dictates that the application should be denied" (L 2004, ch 738, § 23). The record establishes that the court based its decision on defendant's participation in a very extensive drug trafficking enterprise, and that defendant's nationality was not a factor in the denial of his motion. We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims.


Summaries of

People v. Arana

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 8, 2007
45 A.D.3d 311 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

People v. Arana

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. Luis ARANA, Aso Known…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 8, 2007

Citations

45 A.D.3d 311 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 8362
844 N.Y.S.2d 696

Citing Cases

People v. Rizo

The court properly exercised its discretion in determining that substantial justice dictated denial of the…

People v. Savinan

The court properly recognized the degree of discretion it possessed ( compare People v Arana, 32 AD3d 305),…