From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Santana

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 20, 1998
254 A.D.2d 152 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

October 20, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.).


Since defendant had been arrested and indicted after his plea of guilty but before his scheduled sentencing, thereby violating the no-arrest condition of the plea, the court properly imposed an enhanced sentence. The court properly determined the validity of the postplea arrest ( see, People v. Outley, 80 N.Y.2d 702). "Since the defendant had already been indicted, the court was assured that there was a legitimate basis to the new charges" ( People v. Ruffin, 208 A.D.2d 657, 658). Notwithstanding defendant's claims to the contrary, the record indicates that he was given adequate opportunity, under the circumstances, to consult with his attorney and to be heard prior to the imposition of the enhanced sentence. We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining contentions.

Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Wallach, Tom and Andrias, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Santana

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 20, 1998
254 A.D.2d 152 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Santana

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MANUEL SANTANA…

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

Date published: Oct 20, 1998

Citations

254 A.D.2d 152 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
679 N.Y.S.2d 293

Citing Cases

People v. Warde

The fact that the defendant was indicted for a charge underlying the postplea arrest is prima facie evidence…

People v. Pinkston

Therefore, the court was under no obligation to conduct an inquiry into the validity of the post-plea arrest…