People v. Hurley
N.Y.
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Grady Hurley, Appellant.
Attorneys
- APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
- Joseph A. Zayas and Philip L. Weinstein for appellant.
- Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney (Hildy B. Levine and Donald J. Siewert of counsel), for respondent.
majority
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
The sentence claim now advanced is unpreserved for our review (People v Ruz, 70 NY2d 942, 943; People v Ingram, 67 NY2d 897, 899). 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 lVá 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. •
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
Chat with this case using AI
Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this case, check whether it is still good law, and see every case that cites it. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.