People v. Hurley

• Citation: 553 N.E.2d 1017,75 N.Y.2d 887,554 N.Y.S.2d 469
• Parties: , 553 N.E.2d 1017 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Grady HURLEY, Appellant.
• Decision Date: 22 March 1990
• Court: New York Court of Appeals

Page 469

554 N.Y.S.2d 469

75 N.Y.2d 887, 553 N.E.2d 1017

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Grady HURLEY, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

March 22, 1990.

Joseph A. Zayas and Philip L. Weinstein, New York City, for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, Dist. Atty. (Hildy B. Levine and Donald J. Siewert, New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division, 151 A.D.2d 1053, 544 N.Y.S.2d 263, should be affirmed.

The sentence claim now advanced is unpreserved for our review (People v. Ruz, 70 N.Y.2d 942, 943, 524 N.Y.S.2d 668, 519 N.E.2d 614; People v. Ingram, 67 N.Y.2d 897, 899, 501 N.Y.S.2d 804, 492 N.E.2d 1220). Defendant argues that the trial court's 2-to-4-year sentence improperly penalized him for exercising his right to a jury trial. At sentencing, he asserted that the People had earlier offered him a sentence of 1 1/3 to 4 years if he pleaded guilty and that he had been advised by his lawyer that he would receive the same sentence if he went to trial. The sentencing court clarified the record by noting that defendant had been offered a reduced sentence if he pleaded guilty or if he waived a jury and was convicted after a bench trial. The defendant and his attorney made no protest or objection as the 2-to-4-year predicate felony offender sentence was imposed, with the sentencing Judge adding this was not being done as a penalty but on all the usual sentencing factors.

WACHTLER, C.J., and SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE, HANCOCK and BELLACOSA, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.