People v Marrow (Corey)

Annotate this Case
[*1] People v Marrow (Corey) 2016 NY Slip Op 51046(U) Decided on June 29, 2016 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on June 29, 2016
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : MARANO, P.J., IANNACCI and BRANDS, JJ.
2014-372 W CR

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Corey Marrow, Appellant.

Appeal, as limited by the brief, from a sentence of the City Court of Mount Vernon, Westchester County (Mark A. Gross, J.), imposed January 29, 2014, upon defendant's conviction, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree.

ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant was to be sentenced on his conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree (Penal Law § 220.03) to a term of six months of incarceration. After defendant failed to appear in court for sentencing, the court imposed an enhanced sentence of nine months of incarceration. It is undisputed that defendant appeared in court during the afternoon of the date scheduled for sentencing, albeit after a bench warrant had been issued. Defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from the enhanced sentence.

As it is undisputed that defendant has fully served his enhanced sentence and has been released from custody, his claim that the City Court erred in imposing it has been rendered academic (see People v Walker, 127 AD3d 1506 [2015]; People v Nicholson, 31 AD3d 468, 468-469 [2006]; People v Farmer, 50 Misc 3d 141[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 50199[U], *2 [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2016]; People v Pompi, 31 Misc 3d 145[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 50936[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2011]).

Accordingly, the sentence is affirmed.

Marano, P.J., Iannacci and Brands, JJ., concur.


Decision Date: June 29, 2016

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.