History
  • No items yet
midpage
Carozza v. City of New York
829 N.Y.S.2d 501
N.Y. App. Div.
2007
Check Treatment

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v DAMON MURRAY, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York

829 N.Y.S.2d 106

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Benitez, J.), entered October 20, 2004

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Benitez, J.), entered October 20, 2004, which denied defendant’s CPL 440.20 motion to set aside his sentence, unanimously affirmed.

The procedure by which the sentencing court determined that defendant was eligible for consecutive sentences did not violate the principles of

Apprendi v New Jersey (530 US 466 [2000]). In imposing consecutive sentences for defendant’s convictions of robbery in the first degree and assault in the first degree and a concurrent sentence on the conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, the court did not engage in any fact-finding, but instead made a legal determination based on facts already found by the jury (see
People v Lloyd, 23 AD3d 296 [2005]
, lv denied
6 NY3d 755 [2005]
;
United States v White, 240 F3d 127 [2d Cir 2001]
, cert denied
540 US 857 [2003]
; cf
People v Parks, 95 NY2d 811 [2000]
). Concur—Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Malone, JJ.

Case Details

Case Name: Carozza v. City of New York
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Feb 13, 2007
Citation: 829 N.Y.S.2d 501
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.