| People v Howard |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 07517 [111 AD3d 1021] |
| November 14, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vJeffrey Howard, Appellant. |
—[*1] P. David Soares, District Attorney, Albany (Christopher J. Torelli of counsel), forrespondent.
Rose, J. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Breslin, J.),rendered June 7, 2010, which resentenced defendant following his conviction of thecrimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminalpossession of a controlled substance in the third degree.
In 2004, defendant was convicted after a trial of, among other things, criminal sale ofa controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlledsubstance in the third degree and was sentenced, as a second felony offender, to anaggregate prison term of 12½ to 25 years. His conviction was thereafter affirmedon appeal (21 AD3d 585 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 853 [2005]). Subsequently,defendant applied for resentencing pursuant to CPL 440.46 and, ultimately, in the courseof an appearance before County Court, defendant agreed that the original sentence forthese crimes would be vacated and the court would resentence him to 9½ years inprison to be followed by three years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals,principally arguing that his resentence is harsh and excessive. We disagree. "Given,among other things, defendant's lengthy criminal record, we find no basis to concludethat the court abused its discretion, nor do we find any extraordinary circumstanceswarranting a reduction in the interest of justice" (People v Carter, 97 AD3d 852, 852 [2012], lvdenied 19 NY3d 1024 [2012] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citationomitted]; see People v Reid,85 AD3d 1394, 1395 [2011]).[*2]
Finally, inasmuch as the contentions indefendant's pro se brief raise matters outside the subject record, they are not properlyaddressed herein.
Peters, P.J., Lahtinen and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.