People v. Beckers

94 A.D.3d 774, 941 N.Y.S.2d 515
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 3, 2012
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 94 A.D.3d 774 (People v. Beckers) 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. Beckers, 94 A.D.3d 774, 941 N.Y.S.2d 515 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Kahn, J.), rendered February 28, 2011, convicting him of attempted dissemination of indecent material to a minor in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review an order of protection issued at the time of sentencing.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contentions that his plea was not voluntary, knowing, and intelligent due to the trial court’s failure to advise him, at the time of his plea, that an order of protection would be imposed upon him at sentencing and that he would be required to register as a sex offender (see People v Williams, 84 AD3d 1417, 1418 [2011]; People v Morrow, 48 AD3d 704, 705 [2008]; People v [775]*775Dixon, 16 AD3d 517 [2005]). These contentions are, in any event, without merit (see People v Gravino, 14 NY3d 546, 553 [2010]; People v Vasquez, 85 AD3d 1068 [2011]; People v Smith, 85 AD3d 1065 [2011]; People v Margillo, 69 AD3d 655 [2010]).

The defendant’s contention that the order of protection was improperly issued since the sentencing court failed to specify any reason on the record for issuance of the order (see CPL 530.12 [5]) is belied by the record. Further, with respect to the duration of the order of protection, contrary to the defendant’s contention, the sentencing court complied with CPL 530.12 by 1£fix[ing]” the duration of the order, as required by that statute (CPL 530.12 [5]). Skelos, J.P, Belen, Lott and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Valentin
2019 NY Slip Op 6808 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Chaudhary (Mazhar)
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016
People v. Bernardini
142 A.D.3d 671 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
People v. Holcombe
116 A.D.3d 1063 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Deal
115 A.D.3d 975 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
94 A.D.3d 774, 941 N.Y.S.2d 515, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-beckers-nyappdiv-2012.