Opinion
No. 113636
10-31-2024
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Braian Ramirez-Ortiz, Appellant.
Todd G. Monahan, Schenectady, for appellant. Karen A. Heggen, District Attorney, Ballston Spa (Benjamin E. Holwitt of counsel), for respondent.
Calendar Date:October 4, 2024
Todd G. Monahan, Schenectady, for appellant.
Karen A. Heggen, District Attorney, Ballston Spa (Benjamin E. Holwitt of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Egan Jr., J.P., Clark, Aarons, Ceresia and McShan, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Saratoga County (James A. Murphy III, J.), rendered March 29, 2022, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal mischief in the third degree.
In satisfaction of a superior court information and other pending charges, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal mischief in the third degree and agreed to waive his right to appeal. Pursuant to the terms of the plea agreement, County Court sentenced defendant, as a second felony offender, to a prison term of 1½ to 3 years. This appeal ensued.
Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that the sentence, which he alleges is based upon unreliable and inaccurate information contained in the presentence report, should be vacated. As the records of the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision confirm that defendant has reached the maximum expiration of his sentence, his challenge to the agreed-upon sentence is moot (see People v Morris, ___ A.D.3d ___, ___, 217 N.Y.S.3d 299, 299 [3d Dept 2024]; People v Finn, 215 A.D.3d 1179, 1180 [3d Dept 2023], lv denied 40 N.Y.3d 928 [2023]; People v Ramsoondar, 206 A.D.3d 1157, 1161 [3d Dept 2022]; People v Boodrow, 205 A.D.3d 1134, 1137 [3d Dept 2022]), and the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 717 [1980]; see also People v Baldwin, 39 N.Y.3d 1097, 1098-1099 [2023] [Wilson, J., concurring]).
Egan Jr., J.P., Clark, Aarons, Ceresia and McShan, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot.