From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Robinson

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Feb 3, 2017
147 A.D.3d 1351 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

02-03-2017

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Adam J. ROBINSON, Defendant–Appellant.

D.J. & J.A. Cirando, Esqs., Syracuse (Bradley E. Keem of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Gregory S. Oakes, District Attorney, Oswego (Amy L. Hallenbeck of Counsel), for Respondent.


D.J. & J.A. Cirando, Esqs., Syracuse (Bradley E. Keem of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant.

Gregory S. Oakes, District Attorney, Oswego (Amy L. Hallenbeck of Counsel), for Respondent.

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, DeJOSEPH, CURRAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

MEMORANDUM:Defendant appeals from a judgment revoking the sentence of probation previously imposed upon his conviction of criminal contempt in the first degree (Penal Law § 215.51[b][iv] ), and sentencing him to a term of imprisonment. We reject defendant's contention that the People failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he violated the terms and conditions of his probation (see People v. Ortiz, 94 A.D.3d 1436, 1436, 942 N.Y.S.2d 838, lv. denied 19 N.Y.3d 999, 951 N.Y.S.2d 475, 975 N.E.2d 921 ; People v. Wells, 69 A.D.3d 1228, 1229, 894 N.Y.S.2d 213 ). Indeed, after the People presented evidence of the violation, defendant testified that he failed to complete a drug treatment program and repeatedly used marihuana in violation of the terms of his probation. We thus conclude that there was the necessary "residuum of competent legal evidence" that defendant violated a condition of his probation (People v. Pringle, 72 A.D.3d 1629, 1630, 900 N.Y.S.2d 215, lv. denied 15 N.Y.3d 855, 909 N.Y.S.2d 32, 935 N.E.2d 824 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v. Cherry, 238 A.D.2d 940, 940, 661 N.Y.S.2d 146, lv. denied 90 N.Y.2d 891, 662 N.Y.S.2d 434, 685 N.E.2d 215 ; see generally People v. Pettway, 286 A.D.2d 865, 865, 730 N.Y.S.2d 597, lv. denied 97 N.Y.2d 686, 738 N.Y.S.2d 302, 764 N.E.2d 406 ). "Although defendant offered excuses for his various violations, County Court was entitled to discredit those excuses and instead to credit the testimony of the People's witnesses" (People v. Donohue, 64 A.D.3d 1187, 1188, 883 N.Y.S.2d 672 ; see People v. Strauts, 67 A.D.3d 1381, 1381, 889 N.Y.S.2d 783, lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 773, 898 N.Y.S.2d 105, 925 N.E.2d 110 ).

We reject defendant's further contention that the court erred in denying his request for substitution of counsel, inasmuch as "defendant failed to proffer specific allegations of a ‘seemingly serious request’ that would require the court to engage in a minimal inquiry" (People v. Porto, 16 N.Y.3d 93, 100, 917 N.Y.S.2d 74, 942 N.E.2d 283 ; see People v. Wilson, 112 A.D.3d 1317, 1318, 977 N.Y.S.2d 515, lv. denied 23 N.Y.3d 1069, 994 N.Y.S.2d 328, 18 N.E.3d 1149 ; People v. Woods, 110 A.D.3d 748, 748, 972 N.Y.S.2d 97, lv. denied 23 N.Y.3d 969, 988 N.Y.S.2d 577, 11 N.E.3d 727 ).

Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Robinson

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Feb 3, 2017
147 A.D.3d 1351 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

People v. Robinson

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Adam J. ROBINSON…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Date published: Feb 3, 2017

Citations

147 A.D.3d 1351 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
47 N.Y.S.3d 179

Citing Cases

People v. Robinson

Judge: Decision Reported Below: 4th Dept: 147 AD3d 1351 (Oswego)…

People v. Mayerat

Defendant further contends that the evidence at the hearing was insufficient to establish that he violated a…