| People v Lashley |
| 2021 NY Slip Op 06938 [37 NY3d 1140] |
| December 14, 2021 |
| Court of Appeals |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. |
| As corrected through Wednesday, February 16, 2022 |
| The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Sharon Lashley, Respondent. |
Argued November 18, 2021; decided December 14, 2021
People v Lashley, 178 AD3d 506, reversed.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York City (Michael D. Tarbutton and Stephen J. Kress of counsel), for appellant.
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York City (Allison N. Kahl of counsel), for respondent.
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and case remitted to that Court for consideration of the facts and issues raised but not determined upon appeal to that Court.
Because defendant failed to challenge the CPL 400.21 predicate felony statement filed by the People in the court of first instance, her claim that her sentence was illegal due to the failure to include the tolling periods in that document did not present a question of law for purposes of appellate review (People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636 [1983]). Defendant's claim was not reviewable under the narrow illegal sentence exception to the preservation requirement because it was not "readily discernible from the trial record" that the sentence the court imposed was not [*2]within the permissible range[FN*] (People v Nieves, 2 NY3d 310, 315-316 [2004]; see People v Samms, 95 NY2d 52, 56-58 [2000]).
Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Fahey, Garcia, Wilson, Singas and Cannataro concur.
Order reversed and case remitted to the Appellate Division, First Department, for consideration of the facts and issues raised but not determined on appeal to that Court, in a memorandum.