People v. Agard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Agard

2017 NY Slip Op 4399, 151 A.D.3d 456, 53 N.Y.S.3d 527

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 6, 2017

Docket4234/09 4179 4178

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 4399 (People v. Agard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Agard, 2017 NY Slip Op 4399, 151 A.D.3d 456, 53 N.Y.S.3d 527 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, New York County (Melissa C. Jackson, J.), rendered August 31, 2015, resentenc-ing defendant, as a second felony offender, to consecutive terms of 12 years and 2 to 4 years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the second felony offender adjudication and substituting a second violent felony offender adjudication, and otherwise affirmed.

Upon our remand for a new second violent felony offender adjudication and sentencing (127 AD3d 602 [1st Dept 2015]), the resentencing court determined that defendant’s predicate violent felony conviction, which was obtained in violation of People v Catu (4 NY3d 242 [2005]), could not be used to enhance defendant’s sentence, and it adjudicated him a second (nonviolent) felony offender on the basis of another predicate conviction, while reimposing defendant’s original sentence. However, as defendant concedes, the subsequent decision of the Court of Appeals in People v Smith (28 NY3d 191 [2016]) precludes retroactive application of Catu to invalidate a sentence enhancement. Accordingly, defendant’s original adjudication as a second violent felony offender was lawful.

As for defendant’s appeal, we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur—Renwick, J.P., Richter, Feinman, Gische and Kahn, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, New York County (Melissa C. Jackson, J.), rendered August 31, 2015, resentenc-ing defendant, as a second felony offender, to consecutive terms of 12 years and 2 to 4 years, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of vacating the second felony offender adjudication and substituting a second violent felony offender adjudication, and otherwise affirmed.

Upon our remand for a new second violent felony offender adjudication and sentencing (127 AD3d 602 [1st Dept 2015]), the resentencing court determined that defendant’s predicate violent felony conviction, which was obtained in violation of People v Catu (4 NY3d 242 [2005]), could not be used to enhance defendant’s sentence, and it adjudicated him a second (nonviolent) felony offender on the basis of another predicate conviction, while reimposing defendant’s original sentence. However, as defendant concedes, the subsequent decision of the Court of Appeals in People v Smith (28 NY3d 191 [2016]) precludes retroactive application of Catu to invalidate a sentence enhancement. Accordingly, defendant’s original adjudication as a second violent felony offender was lawful.

As for defendant’s appeal, we perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Concur—Renwick, J.P., Richter, Feinman, Gische and Kahn, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 4399, 151 A.D.3d 456, 53 N.Y.S.3d 527, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-agard-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack