People v. Caban
| Decision Date | 22 January 1998 |
| Citation | 668 N.Y.S.2d 181,246 A.D.2d 438 |
| Parties | , 1998 N.Y. Slip Op. 494 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Douglas CABAN, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Penny Rosenberg, for Respondent.
Harold V. Ferguson, Jr., for Defendant-Appellant.
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and ROSENBERGER, WALLACH, RUBIN and TOM, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered June 22, 1995, convicting defendant, upon plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second (two counts) and third (one count) degrees, and sentencing him to concurrent prison terms of 6 years to life on the second-degree convictions, consecutive with 2 to 6 years on the third-degree conviction, for an aggregate indeterminate sentence of 8 years to life, unanimously affirmed.
On appeal, defendant challenges only the excessiveness of his sentence, urging that in the course of sentencing proceedings, the court made explicit reference to his alleged association with a notorious criminal gang (the "Wild Cowboys"), for which defendant was depicted as drug supplier. Defendant argues that this assumption of the sentencing court had no factual foundation whatsoever, and to the extent that this factor became an ingredient of his sentence, amelioration is logically required.
Preliminarily, we note that defendant's plea covered an indictment charging four separate sales of narcotics to undercover officers, three of which exceeded one-half ounce in weight. Therefore, defendant's sentence, based on a voluntary plea bargain, is justified by these circumstances without reference to other aggravating factors.
With respect to the contested gang involvement, we conclude that the point is not preserved. At the sentencing proceedings, defendant and his counsel stood silent and made no objection to the Judge's "gang" reference. That would have been the appropriate point for defendant to assert his objection to the allegedly erroneous information; his silence forecloses our ordinary review power. We perceive no reason for review in the interest of justice.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fate v. Charles
...a guilty plea as to that indictment is tantamount to a guilty plea as to the charging indictment, see, e.g., People v. Caban, 246 A.D.2d 438, 439, 668 N.Y.S.2d 181 (1st Dep't 1998). It seems clear that Fate pleaded guilty to the possession charge as part of his guilty plea to Indictments 49......
-
Fate v. Charles
...a guilty plea as to that indictment is tantamount to a guilty plea as to the charging indictment, see, e.g., People v. Caban, 246 A.D.2d 438, 439 (1st Dep't 1998). It seems clear that Fate pleaded guilty to the possession charge as part of his guilty plea to Indictments 496-2010 and 284-201......
-
People v. Bugman
...made no objection to the court's comments at sentencing, thereby failing to preserve the issue for our review (see, People v. Caban, 246 A.D.2d 438, 668 N.Y.S.2d 181, lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 970, 672 N.Y.S.2d 850, 695 N.E.2d 719). In any event, defendant was not punished for his silence. The n......
-
People v. Caban
...672 N.Y.S.2d 850 91 N.Y.2d 970, 695 N.E.2d 719 People v. Douglas Caban Court of Appeals of New York April 10, 1998 Kaye, C.J. --- A.D.2d ----, 668 N.Y.S.2d 181 App.Div. 1, New York Denied. ...