People v. DeRobertis

2021 NY Slip Op 01062, 138 N.Y.S.3d 919, 191 A.D.3d 898
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 17, 2021
Docket2018-14646
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 2021 NY Slip Op 01062 (People v. DeRobertis) 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. DeRobertis, 2021 NY Slip Op 01062, 138 N.Y.S.3d 919, 191 A.D.3d 898 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

People v DeRobertis (2021 NY Slip Op 01062)
People v DeRobertis
2021 NY Slip Op 01062
Decided on February 17, 2021
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on February 17, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

2018-14646
2018-14647

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

George DeRobertis, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 10227/17, 223/18)


Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY (Sam Feldman of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Morgan J. Dennehy of counsel; Marielle Burnett on the memorandum), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Martin P. Murphy, J.), both rendered November 2, 2018, convicting him of grand larceny in the third degree under Indictment Number 10227/17, and burglary in the third degree under Indictment Number 223/18, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant's contentions regarding three final orders of protection issued at the time of sentencing are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v Nieves, 2 NY3d 310, 316-318). Moreover, "[b]ecause sentencing courts are in the best position to amend permanent orders of protection, the better practice—and best use of judicial resources—is for a defendant seeking adjustment of such an order to request relief from the issuing court in the first instance, resorting to the appellate courts only if necessary" (People v Nieves, 2 NY3d at 317). Under the circumstances presented, we decline to review the defendant's unpreserved contentions in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see People v Colon, 187 AD3d 780; People v Daniel A., 183 AD3d 909; People v Flores, 178 AD3d 726).

DILLON, J.P., CHAMBERS, AUSTIN, HINDS-RADIX and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Newman
2025 NY Slip Op 00335 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Mensah
221 A.D.3d 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People v. Zhiminaicela-Duchitanga
184 N.Y.S.3d 607 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People v. Holmes
167 N.Y.S.3d 828 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Devore
202 A.D.3d 707 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Portillo
2021 NY Slip Op 04379 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Thomas
2021 NY Slip Op 02322 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2021 NY Slip Op 01062, 138 N.Y.S.3d 919, 191 A.D.3d 898, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-derobertis-nyappdiv-2021.