From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Marrero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 21, 1995
219 A.D.2d 518 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

September 21, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Covington, J.).


Because defendant did not object or make any record with respect to his claim that the court failed to meaningfully respond to the jury note, the claim is both unpreserved (CPL 470.05) and unreviewable on direct appeal ( People v Brown, 192 A.D.2d 666, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 1070).

Since a conviction on the third degree criminal sale count required a conviction on the third degree criminal possession count, the latter should have been dismissed in the interest of justice as a noninclusory concurrent count ( People v Gaul, 63 A.D.2d 563).

In light of defendant's prior record and employment background, the court's imposition of the maximum sentence of 12 1/2 to 25 years for the sale conviction is excessive, and we reduce in the interest of justice to the extent indicated.

Concur — Wallach, J.P., Kupferman, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Marrero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 21, 1995
219 A.D.2d 518 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Marrero

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EDWIN MARRERO…

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

Date published: Sep 21, 1995

Citations

219 A.D.2d 518 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
631 N.Y.S.2d 665

Citing Cases

People v. Hendricks

Defendant's claim that the trial court erred in not charging the jury that police testimony should be…

People v. Davis

Defendant's claim that the court failed to respond meaningfully to a jury note is also unpreserved as he…