PEOPLE v. GRAY (2007)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), rendered December 7, 2005, convicting him of gang assault in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant pleaded guilty to gang assault in the first degree after a fight between his brother and another resulted in a fatal shooting.   The defendant and two codefendants, who were at the scene to assist the brother, all discharged firearms during the fight.   A bullet from the gun of a codefendant killed the victim.

 The defendant argues that his sentence is excessive and that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying him youthful offender treatment.   However, because the defendant received the sentence for which he expressly bargained, which did not include youthful offender treatment, he has no cause to complain on appeal (see People v. Wynn, 40 A.D.3d 893, 894, 834 N.Y.S.2d 482, lv. denied 9 N.Y.3d 871, 840 N.Y.S.2d 900, 872 N.E.2d 1206;  People v. Deale, 29 A.D.3d 602, 603, 813 N.Y.S.2d 311;  People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816, 817, 475 N.Y.S.2d 351).   In any event, in light of the seriousness of the crime, the sentence imposed was not excessive.   Further, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant youthful offender treatment (see People v. Demosthene, 21 A.D.3d 384, 798 N.Y.S.2d 918).

 By pleading guilty, the defendant forfeited the claim, raised in his supplemental pro se brief, concerning a nonjurisdictional defect in the indictment (see People v. Purnell, 22 A.D.3d 871, 803 N.Y.S.2d 175).

The defendant's remaining contentions, raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit.