People v. Ward
| Decision Date | 19 May 2016 |
| Docket Number | 106851. |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert WARD, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
139 A.D.3d 1254
30 N.Y.S.3d 582 (Mem)
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 03913
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Robert WARD, Appellant.
106851.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
May 19, 2016.
James E. Long, Public Defender, Albany (Theresa M. Suozzi of counsel), for appellant.
P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Vincent Stark of counsel), for respondent.
Before: LAHTINEN, J.P., McCARTHY, GARRY, ROSE and AARONS, JJ.
McCARTHY, J.
Appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), dated May 13, 2014 in Albany County, which denied defendant's motion for resentencing pursuant to CPL 440.46.
In March 1983, defendant was convicted of burglary in the second degree, a violent felony (see Penal Law § 70.02[1][b] ). Thereafter, in January 1998, the record indicates that defendant was convicted of attempted robbery in the second degree, a violent felony (see Penal Law § 70.02[1][c] ), and sentenced to a prison term of five years. In February 2004, defendant was convicted of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, a class B felony, and was sentenced to a prison term of 12 ½ to 25 years (People v. Ward, 27 A.D.3d 776, 776, 809 N.Y.S.2d 678 [2006], lv. denied 7 N.Y.3d 764, 819 N.Y.S.2d 890, 853 N.E.2d 261 [2006] ). In January 2014, defendant moved
to be resentenced on his 2004 conviction pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Act of 2009 (see L. 2009, ch. 56, as codified in CPL 440.46 ). Following a hearing, Supreme Court issued an oral decision from the bench denying the application, finding, based upon defendant's previous violent felony convictions, that he was statutorily ineligible for resentencing under the Drug Law Reform Act of 2009. Defendant now appeals.
“Appeals in criminal cases are strictly limited to those authorized by statute” (People v. Bautista, 7 N.Y.3d 838, 838–839, 823 N.Y.S.2d 754, 857 N.E.2d 49 [2006] ; see CPL 450.10, 450.15, 450.20 ; ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- People v. Bowman
-
People v. Kiah
...for the trial court to order production of the requested records and conduct an in camera review (see 67 N.Y.S.3d 341 People v. Bowman, 139 A.D.3d at 1254, 32 N.Y.S.3d 362 ; People v. Viera, 133 A.D.3d 622, 623, 18 N.Y.S.3d 706 [2015], lv denied 26 N.Y.3d 1151, 32 N.Y.S.3d 65, 51 N.E.3d 576......
-
People v. Scott
...of the [c]ourt," a bench decision is neither a substitute for the required written order nor an appealable paper (cf. People v. Ward, 139 A.D.3d 1254, 1255, 30 N.Y.S.3d 582 [2016] ; People v. Joseph, 89 A.D.3d 1324, 1324–1325, 932 N.Y.S.2d 918 [2011] ). Notably, neither the transcript of th......
-
People v. Ward
...dismissed because the oral decision of Supreme Court (Teresi, J.) was not reduced to a required written order (People v. Ward, 139 A.D.3d 1254, 1255, 30 N.Y.S.3d 582 [2016] ). The order has now been issued and submitted for consideration on this appeal.2 Defendant's release to parole during......