From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rodriguez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 21, 2003
301 A.D.2d 616 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2000-09317

Submitted December 16, 2002.

January 21, 2003.

Appeal by the People, pursuant to CPL 450.20(4), from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Pitts, J.), imposed September 6, 2000, which, upon the defendant's conviction of burglary in the second degree (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, sentenced him as a second felony offender to two concurrent determinate terms of seven years imprisonment.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Michael A. Gajdos of counsel), for appellant.

Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Monroe A. Semble of counsel), for respondent.

Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the sentence is reversed, on the law, the adjudication of the defendant as a second felony offender is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings consistent herewith, to determine whether the defendant should be adjudicated a persistent violent felony offender pursuant to CPL 400.16.

The People filed a persistent violent felony offender statement pursuant to CPL 400.16, indicating, inter alia, that the defendant was convicted in 1981 of robbery in the second degree and in 1986 of burglary in the second degree. At a hearing, the defendant opposed his adjudication as a persistent violent felony offender on numerous grounds, including his claim that his 1986 conviction was unconstitutionally obtained because, at his trial, an alternate juror was substituted for an ill juror without an adequate inquiry by the trial court pursuant to People v. Page ( 72 N.Y.2d 69; see CPL 270.35). The Supreme Court agreed and sentenced the defendant as a second felony offender.

Contrary to the Supreme Court's determination, the replacement of a seated juror with an alternate before the commencement of deliberations is not, as a rule, a violation of the constitutional right to trial by jury (see People v. Jeanty, 94 N.Y.2d 507, 517; see also People v. Ortiz, 92 N.Y.2d 955, 957). Since the transcript of the defendant's trial reveals that the juror telephoned to inform the court that she was ill with the flu, and no objection was raised by the parties to the substitution of an alternate juror, the substitution was not arbitrary or made without good cause (see People v. Jeanty, supra). Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in determining that the 1986 conviction was unconstitutionally obtained on this ground for the purpose of determining the defendant's status as a persistent violent felony offender.

We remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings to determine whether the defendant should be adjudicated a persistent violent felony offender pursuant to CPL 400.16, based on the 1981 and 1986 convictions, including consideration of the defendant's other contentions which were raised in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, but not reached by that court, and for resentencing thereafter.

FLORIO, J.P., O'BRIEN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Rodriguez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 21, 2003
301 A.D.2d 616 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Rodriguez

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., appellant, v. ALFREDO RODRIGUEZ, respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 21, 2003

Citations

301 A.D.2d 616 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
753 N.Y.S.2d 854

Citing Cases

Rodriguez v. Conway

The Appellate Division, Second Department, held that the trial court erred in determining that petitioner's…

People v. Rodriguez

On September 6, 2000 the Supreme Court held a hearing at which the defendant appeared and, upon the…