| People v Gray |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 09794 [46 AD3d 703] |
| December 11, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Naquan Gray, Appellant. |
—[*1] Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Anne E. Oh of counsel; Kyle Pulis onthe brief), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.),rendered December 7, 2005, convicting him of gang assault in the first degree, upon his plea ofguilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant pleaded guilty to gang assault in the first degree after a fight between hisbrother and another resulted in a fatal shooting. The defendant and two codefendants, who wereat the scene to assist the brother, all discharged firearms during the fight. A bullet from the gunof a codefendant killed the victim.
The defendant argues that his sentence is excessive and that the court improvidentlyexercised its discretion in denying him youthful offender treatment. However, because thedefendant received the sentence for which he expressly bargained, which did not include youthfuloffender treatment, he has no cause to complain on appeal (see People v Wynn, 40 AD3d 893, 894 [2007], lv denied 9NY3d 871 [2007]; People v Deale,29 AD3d 602, 603 [2006]; People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816, 817 [1984]). Inany event, in light of the seriousness of the crime, the sentence imposed was not excessive.Further, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant youthfuloffender treatment (see People vDemosthene, 21 AD3d 384 [2005]).[*2]
By pleading guilty, the defendant forfeited the claim,raised in his supplemental pro se brief, concerning a nonjurisdictional defect in the indictment(see People v Purnell, 22 AD3d871 [2005]).
The defendant's remaining contentions, raised in his supplemental pro se brief, areunpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Crane, J.P., Ritter, Fisher,Covello and Dickerson, JJ., concur.