People v. Cerasaro

• Decision Date: 15 January 2020
• Docket Number: S.C.I. Nos. 80/07, 209/15,2015–11989,2015–11990
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Michael CERASARO, Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

179 A.D.3d 832

113 N.Y.S.3d 884 (Mem)

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent,

v.Michael CERASARO, Appellant.

2015–11989

2015–11990

S.C.I. Nos. 80/07, 209/15

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

Submitted—November 20, 2019

January 15, 2020

Arza Feldman, Manhasset, NY, for appellant.

William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.

RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JEFFREY A. COHEN, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment and the amended judgment are affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the sentences imposed violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v. Pena, 28 N.Y.3d 727, 730, 49 N.Y.S.3d 342, 71 N.E.3d 930 ; People v. Hassan, 172 A.D.3d 744, 745, 97 N.Y.S.3d 494 ) and, in any event, without merit (see People v. Parsley, 150 A.D.3d 894, 896, 55 N.Y.S.3d 267 ; People v. Miller, 74 A.D.3d 1097, 1097, 903 N.Y.S.2d 131 ). The sentences imposed were not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675 ).

BALKIN, J.P., CHAMBERS, COHEN and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.