THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. SHAQUEL WILLIAMS DEFENDANT APPELLANT

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. SHAQUEL WILLIAMS, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.

KA 12–02100

Decided: December 23, 2016

PRESENT:  WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (PIOTR BANASIAK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (JAMES P. MAXWELL OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:  We previously held this case, reserved decision, and remitted the matter for Supreme Court to make and state for the record a determination whether defendant is a youthful offender (People v. Williams, 134 AD3d 1572;  see generally People v. Rudolph, 21 NY3d 497, 503).  Upon remittal, the court, after considering the appropriate factors (see People v. Cruickshank, 105 A.D.2d 325, 334, affd sub nom.  People v. Dawn Maria C., 67 N.Y.2d 625), determined that granting defendant youthful offender status would not serve the interest of justice (see CPL 720.20[1][a] ).  We conclude that the court did not thereby abuse its discretion (see People v. Agee, 140 AD3d 1704, 1704–1705, lv denied 28 NY3d 925), and we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to adjudicate defendant a youthful offender (see People v. Hall, 130 AD3d 1495, 1496, lv denied 26 NY3d 968).  We further conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court