People v Laurent
2009 NY Slip Op 00407 [58 AD3d 754]
January 20, 2009
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, March 11, 2009


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

[*1]Douglas G. Rankin & Assoc., P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Solomon Neubortof counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Walsh, J.),rendered July 29, 2005, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, andimposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The terms of the defendant's sentence were clearly set forth by the Supreme Court, and thedefendant acknowledged that he understood those terms. Thus, the defendant's claim that hemisunderstood the terms of his sentence is without merit (see People v Anderson, 230AD2d 916 [1996]; People v Kai Ming Hou, 193 AD2d 759 [1993]; People v Davis,161 AD2d 787 [1990]). The record further indicates that the defendant received meaningfulrepresentation of counsel at his plea and sentence (see People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137[1981]; People v Kai Ming Hou, 193 AD2d 759 [1993]).[*2]

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see Peoplev Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Skelos, J.P., Dillon, Carni and Leventhal, JJ., concur.


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.