THE PEOPLE &C., RESPONDENT, v. RUDOLPH YOUNG, APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 2)
94 N.Y.2d 171 (1999).
November 23, 1999
4 No. 172
(99 NY Int. 0154)
Decided November 23, 1999
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
_________________________________________________________________
Brian Shiffrin, for appellant.
Robert Mastrocola, for respondent.
New York State Defenders Association, Inc., amicus
curiae.
KAYE, CHIEF JUDGE:
Defendant was charged with burglarizing two houses in April 1991 and
stealing, among other things, two 12-gauge shotguns, ammunition, two
diamond rings and a stereo set. Aftera jury trial, he was convicted of
first-degree robbery, first- and second-degree burglary, criminal
possession of stolen property in the fourth and fifth degrees, and
grand larceny in the fourth degree. Supreme Court sentenced defendant,
as a persistent violent felony offender, to concurrent indeterminate
prison terms of 25 years to life on the first-degree robbery and
first-degree burglary counts, to run consecutively to a sentence of 20
years to life on the second-degree burglary count. In addition, the
court sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to concurrent
two-to-four year terms on the fourth-degree possession of stolen
property and grand larceny counts. Finally, defendant received a
one-year sentence on the fifth-degree possession of stolen property
count. Defendant's aggregate sentence totaled 45 years to life.
In imposing sentence, the Trial Judge recounted defendant's criminal
history, including his prior convictions in Georgia, North Carolina
and New York, and added that defendant was "being held accountable * *
* for the things that (he had) done in (his) life." The court
described defendant as "a confrontational burglar," "any homeowner's
worst nightmare" and "a clear threat * * * to the community." The
Judge further noted that, although defendant had attempted to downplay
his criminal record, "there is no forgetting the past when it comes to
SNIPPETS:
THE PEOPLE &C., RESPONDENT, v. RUDOLPH YOUNG, APPELLANT.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
KAYE, CHIEF JUDGE:
Defendant was charged with burglarizing two houses in April 1991 and stealing, among other
Aftera jury trial, he was convicted of first-degree robbery, first- and second-degree
Supreme Court sentenced defendant, as a persistent violent felony offender, to concurrent
Prior to sentencing, the second Trial Judge adjudicated defendant a persistent felony
On appeal, defendant contends that, under People v Van Pelt (76 NY2d 156) and North Carolina
"To punish a person because he has done what the law plainly allows him to do is a due
In order to insure that trial courts do not impose longer sentences to punish defendants for
"hose reasons must be based on objective information concerning identifiable conduct on the
Rather, what "triggers the presumption is the opportunity which the particular situation
Here, defendant's aggregate sentence after retrial of 25 years to life was lower than his
In Knapp v Leonardo, cert denied 515 US 1136), the defendant was initially convicted of
Defendant's argument that permitting a flexible approach would deter appeals is unconvincing.
Opinion by Chief Judge Kaye.
|
