PEOPLE v. LAURENT (2009)

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

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Karl LAURENT, appellant.

Decided: January 20, 2009

PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., MARK C. DILLON, EDWARD D. CARNI, and JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, JJ.

Douglas G. Rankin & Assoc., P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Solomon Neubort of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Walsh, J.), rendered July 29, 2005, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The terms of the defendant's sentence were clearly set forth by the Supreme Court, and the defendant acknowledged that he understood those terms. Thus, the defendant's claim that he misunderstood the terms of his sentence is without merit (see People v. Anderson, 230 A.D.2d 916, 647 N.Y.S.2d 91; People v. Kai Ming Hou, 193 A.D.2d 759, 598 N.Y.S.2d 984; People v. Davis, 161 A.D.2d 787, 556 N.Y.S.2d 664). The record further indicates that the defendant received meaningful representation of counsel at his plea and sentence (see People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400; People v. Kai Ming Hou, 193 A.D.2d 759, 598 N.Y.S.2d 984).

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

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law