From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Pett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 18, 2010
74 A.D.3d 1891 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

No. KA 08-02105.

June 18, 2010.

Appeal from a judgment of the Herkimer County Court

(Patrick L. Kirk, J.), rendered June 5, 2008. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the second degree.

JOHN A. HERBOWY, ROME, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

JOHN H. CRANDALL, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, HERKIMER (JACQUELYN M. ASNOE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Present — Scudder, P.J., Peradotto, Carni, Lindley and Sconiers, JJ.


It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by vacating the sentence and as modified the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to Herkimer County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the second degree (Penal Law § 160.10 [b]), defendant contends that County Court erred in enhancing the sentence by imposing restitution inasmuch as restitution was not included in the plea agreement. We agree ( see People v Hunter, 72 AD3d 1536). We therefore modify the judgment by vacating the sentence, and we remit the matter to County Court to impose the promised sentence or to afford defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea. As noted by the Court of Appeals in People v Maliszewski ( 13 NY3d 756), "plea withdrawal can put the defendant in the position he was in prior to admitting guilt" ( id. at 757). If the court elects to afford defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea, and defendant chooses not to do so, the court may sentence defendant to any sentence authorized by law. If that sentence includes restitution, defendant is entitled to a restitution hearing if he so requests. Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the court should have recused itself ( see People v Lebron, 305 AD2d 799, lv denied 100 NY2d 583), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see CPL 470.15 [a]). The sentence, absent the imposition of restitution, is not unduly harsh or severe.


Summaries of

People v. Pett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 18, 2010
74 A.D.3d 1891 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

People v. Pett

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. GARY PETT, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 18, 2010

Citations

74 A.D.3d 1891 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 5443
903 N.Y.S.2d 639

Citing Cases

People v. Terborg

To the extent that defendant challenges the court's refusal to declare a mistrial following the victim's…

People v. Terborg

To the extent that defendant challenges the court's refusal to declare a mistrial following the victim's…