People v Ernesto Arroyo

People v Arroyo 2004 NY Slip Op 02879 [6 AD3d 277] April 20, 2004 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, June 30, 2004

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

—[*1]Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.), rendered June 22, 2001, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 to 8 years, and judgment, same court (Daniel FitzGerald, J.), rendered June 26, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a consecutive term of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court's Sandoval ruling, which limited the People's elicitation of defendant's extensive criminal background, balanced the appropriate factors and was a proper exercise of discretion (see People v Hayes, 97 NY2d 203 [2002]; People v Walker, 83 NY2d 455, 458-459 [1994]; People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292 [1983]).

Defendant received effective assistance of counsel with regard to both of his convictions (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]; see also Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]).

We perceive no basis for reducing either of the sentences.

Defendant's remaining arguments with regard to both of his convictions are unpreserved [*2]and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Williams, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.