People v. Hilaire
Opinion of the Court
Appeal by the de
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that the Supreme Court should have granted him youthful offender treatment is unpreserved for appellate review, since he failed to move to withdraw his plea on this ground (see People v Huffman, 47 AD3d 646 [2008]; People v Stokes, 28 AD3d 592 [2006]; People v Thompson, 16 AD3d 603, 604 [2005]; People v Greene, 13 AD3d 647, 647-648 [2004]). In any event, the denial of youthful offender treatment was a provident exercise of discretion (see People v Small, 7 AD3d 819 [2004]). Rivera, J.P., Lifson, Angiolillo and Balkin, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.