People v Batista

People v Batista 2007 NY Slip Op 08868 [45 AD3d 396] November 15, 2007 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, January 16, 2008

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

—[*1] Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York City (David Crow of counsel), and Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, New York City (Jeremy S. Goldman of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Jessica Slutsky of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael A. Corriero, J.), entered on or about August 3, 2006, which denied defendant's motion to be resentenced pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Act, unanimously affirmed.

Section 23 of the Drug Law Reform Act (L 2004, ch 738) provides, in pertinent part, that the court should grant a resentencing application "unless substantial justice dictates that the application should be denied." The court properly recognized the degree of discretion it possessed (compare People v Arana, 32 AD3d 305 [2006]) as well as the appropriate criteria for granting or denying such an application, and it providently exercised that discretion (see People v Vasquez, 41 AD3d 111 [2007], lv dismissed 9 NY3d 870 [2007]). While on parole, defendant, who had two prior felony drug convictions, sold large amounts of cocaine to undercover officers over a six-month period. The court gave sufficient consideration to defendant's favorable but unremarkable institutional record, and it did not base its determination on any unreliable information. We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Buckley and Malone, JJ.