From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Scott

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 21, 1992
188 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

December 21, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Appelman, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

By absconding prior to sentencing, the defendant unambiguously indicated a defiance of the process of law sufficient to effect a forfeiture of his right to be present at sentencing (see, People v Corley, 67 N.Y.2d 105; People v Harris, 169 A.D.2d 733, affd 79 N.Y.2d 909). In this regard, we note that during the plea allocution, the court expressly advised the defendant that he must keep all court appointments and that if he failed to do so he would be facing a higher sentence than that promised. In addition, given the defendant's extensive criminal background, he must have known the consequences of his failure to appear. Accordingly, we find that the defendant was properly sentenced in absentia (see, People v Corley, supra; People v Harris, supra).

The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Mangano, P.J., Sullivan, O'Brien, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Scott

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 21, 1992
188 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Scott

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CHARLES SCOTT…

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

Date published: Dec 21, 1992

Citations

188 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
591 N.Y.S.2d 483

Citing Cases

People v. Roe

Though defendant was adequately warned of the consequences of absconding, and it is better practice to do so,…

People v. Roe

Though defendant was adequately warned of the consequences of absconding, and it is better practice to do so,…