People v. Brock

• Decision Date: 05 January 2010
• Docket Number: 2007-06450
• Citation: 891 N.Y.S.2d 292,2010 NY Slip Op 164,69 A.D.3d 644
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TANESHIA BROCK, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

69 A.D.3d 644

891 N.Y.S.2d 292

2010 NY Slip Op 164

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TANESHIA BROCK, Appellant.

2007-06450

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

Decided January 5, 2010.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ingram, J.), rendered June 19, 2007, as amended August 1, 2007, convicting her of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review her contention that the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court improperly penalized her for exercising her right to a jury trial, because she did not set forth the issue on the record at the time of sentencing (see People v Hurley, 75 NY2d 887, 888 [1990]; People v Herrera, 16 AD3d 699, 700 [2005]). In any event, the fact that the sentence imposed after trial was greater than the sentence offered during plea negotiations is no indication that the defendant was punished for asserting her right to proceed to trial (see People v Pena, 50 NY2d 400, 411-412 [1980], cert denied 449 US 1087 [1981]; People v Garcia, 66 AD3d 699 [2009]). Moreover, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

COVELLO, J.P., SANTUCCI, CHAMBERS and HALL, JJ., concur.