Opinion
176 Ind. No. 2912/17 Case No. 2019–806
05-04-2023
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Angelo RODRIGUEZ, Defendant–Appellant.
Mark W. Zeno, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Alma D. Gonzalez of counsel), for appellant. Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Jennifer Mitchell of counsel), for respondent.
Mark W. Zeno, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Alma D. Gonzalez of counsel), for appellant.
Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Jennifer Mitchell of counsel), for respondent.
Webber, J.P., Gesmer, Gonza´lez, Scarpulla, Mendez, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Curtis J. Farber, J. at speedy trial motion; Laura A. Ward, J. at plea and sentencing), rendered January 22, 2019, as amended June 29, 2021, convicting defendant of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of four years, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant forfeited review of his speedy trial claim by pleading guilty (see People v. Suarez, 55 N.Y.2d 940, 449 N.Y.S.2d 176, 434 N.E.2d 245 [1982] ). "Defendant was convicted before the effective date of the current version of CPL 30.30(6), which prospectively permits defendants who plead guilty to raise statutory speedy trial claims on appeal, but which is not retroactive" ( People v. Hall, 210 A.D.3d 482, 483, 176 N.Y.S.3d 480 [1st Dept. 2022], lv denied 39 N.Y.3d 1078, 184 N.Y.S.3d 275, 204 N.E.3d 1057 [2023] ; see People v. Lara–Medina, 195 A.D.3d 542, 145 N.Y.S.3d 804 [1st Dept. 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 993, 152 N.Y.S.3d 426, 174 N.E.3d 366 [2021] ). Neither ( People v. Acosta , 189 A.D.3d 508, 508, 133 N.Y.S.3d 807 [2020], lv denied 36 N.Y.3d 1094, 144 N.Y.S.3d 119, 167 N.E.3d 1254 [2021] ) nor ( People v. Person , 184 A.D.3d 447, 126 N.Y.S.3d 14 [2020], lv denied 35 N.Y.3d 1069, 129 N.Y.S.3d 387, 152 N.E.3d 1189 [2020] ), require a contrary result because those cases only addressed the issue of waivability and not retroactivity. In any event, we find that defendant's speedy trial motion was properly denied.
We perceive no basis for further reducing the resentence.