Opinion
2013-04-24
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Julio CAMINO, also known as Caesar, appellant.
Arza Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y., for appellant. Kathleen M. Rice, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Tammy J. Smiley and Kevin C. King of counsel), for respondent.
Arza Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y., for appellant. Kathleen M. Rice, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Tammy J. Smiley and Kevin C. King of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCormack, J.), imposed October 12, 2011, upon his conviction of rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree, and sexual abuse in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, the resentence being, upon the People's consent, no periods of postrelease supervision in addition to the determinate terms of imprisonment previously imposed by the same court (Kowtna, J.) on April 7, 2000.
ORDERED that the resentence is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court improperly resentenced him without obtaining an updated presentence report is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. McGinn, 96 A.D.3d 977, 946 N.Y.S.2d 489;People v. Gledhill, 91 A.D.3d 886, 936 N.Y.S.2d 916;People v. Mannina, 89 A.D.3d 1038, 1038–1039, 933 N.Y.S.2d 570) and, in any event, is without merit ( see People v. Kuey, 83 N.Y.2d 278, 282–283, 609 N.Y.S.2d 568, 631 N.E.2d 574;People v. Watkins, 71 A.D.3d 799, 895 N.Y.S.2d 749;People v. Jandelli, 158 A.D.2d 620, 551 N.Y.S.2d 590;People v. Navarro, 91 A.D.2d 618, 458 N.Y.S.2d 194).
The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court did not afford either the prosecutor or defense counsel the opportunity to make a statement with respect to the resentence, and did not ask the defendant if he wished to make a statement on his own behalf, in violation of CPL 380.50(1), is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. McGinn, 96 A.D.3d at 978, 946 N.Y.S.2d 489;People v. McCant, 79 A.D.3d 908, 912 N.Y.S.2d 422;People v. Chin, 69 A.D.3d 752, 753, 897 N.Y.S.2d 106) and, in any event, is without merit ( see People v. McClain, 35 N.Y.2d 483, 491, 364 N.Y.S.2d 143, 323 N.E.2d 685,cert. denied 423 U.S. 852, 96 S.Ct. 98, 46 L.Ed.2d 76;People v. Regan, 88 A.D.2d 664, 664–665, 450 N.Y.S.2d 516).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit ( see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584;People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).