People v. McPhee

Full title: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Tysheed McPHEE, appellant.

Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 2, 2014

116 A.D.3d 714 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

116 A.D.3d 714

2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 2313

Opinion

2014-04-2

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Tysheed McPHEE, appellant.

Yasmin Daley Duncan, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Joan H. McCarthy of counsel), for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA

Yasmin Daley Duncan, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Joan H. McCarthy of counsel), for respondent.
, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, JEFFREY A. COHEN, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX and JOSEPH J. MALTESE, JJ.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Greller, J.), rendered January 24, 2013, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, who was convicted of armed felony offenses under counts one and two of an indictment, was not eligible for a youthful offender adjudication with respect to those counts, since there were no mitigating circumstances bearing directly upon the manner in which those crimes were committed and his role in those crimes was not minor ( seeCPL 1.20[41]; 720.10[2][a]; [3]; People v. Watts, 91 A.D.3d 678, 679, 935 N.Y.S.2d 893;People v. Henry, 76 A.D.3d 1031, 907 N.Y.S.2d 685;People v. Jhang, 302 A.D.2d 606, 755 N.Y.S.2d 644;People v. O'Neill, 86 A.D.2d 213, 215, 449 N.Y.S.2d 515). Furthermore, considering, among other things, the seriousness of the robbery offense under count three of the indictment, and the defendant's level of cooperation with the authorities, the interests of justice would not be served by the defendant receiving a youthful offender adjudication with respect to that count of the indictment ( see People v. Lopez, 82 A.D.3d 906, 907, 919 N.Y.S.2d 340;People v. Wright, 44 A.D.3d 692, 841 N.Y.S.2d 892;People v. Cruickshank, 105 A.D.2d 325, 333–334, 484 N.Y.S.2d 328,affd. sub nom. People v. Dawn Maria C., 67 N.Y.2d 625, 499 N.Y.S.2d 663, 490 N.E.2d 530).

The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).