People v Murray
2007 NYSlipOp 01217
February 13, 2007
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, April 11, 2007


The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
Damon Murray, Appellant.

[*1]Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Steven R. Berko of counsel), for appellant.Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Dana Levin of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Benitez, J.), entered October 20, 2004, which denied defendant's CPL 440.20 motion to set aside his sentence, unanimously affirmed.

The procedure by which the sentencing court determined that defendant was eligible for consecutive sentences did not violate the principles of Apprendi v New Jersey (530 US 466 [2000]). In imposing consecutive sentences for defendant's convictions of robbery in the first degree and assault in the first degree and a concurrent sentence on the conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, the court did not engage in any fact-finding, but instead made a legal determination based on facts already found by the jury (see People v Lloyd, 23 AD3d 296 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 755 [2005]; United States v White, 240 F3d 127 [2d Cir 2001], cert denied 540 US 857 [2003]; cf. People v Parks, 95 NY2d 811 [2000]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Malone, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.