People v. Douglas

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Douglas

723 N.E.2d 54, 94 N.Y.2d 807, 701 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1999 N.Y. LEXIS 3728

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 18, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by17 cases

This text of 723 N.E.2d 54 (People v. Douglas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Douglas, 723 N.E.2d 54, 94 N.Y.2d 807, 701 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1999 N.Y. LEXIS 3728 (N.Y. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

[808]*808In September 1987, defendant was convicted in Kings County on a charge of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. Supreme Court sentenced him to five years probation and community service. Three and a half years into his probationary term, defendant violated his probation, absconded to Nassau County and was arrested and charged with two separate crimes. Defendant pleaded guilty to robbery in the first degree and in 1992 was sentenced as a second felony offender to 9 to 18 years in prison. In November 1991, Supreme Court, Kings County, issued a declaration of delinquency, and subsequently issued a warrant. After a violation of probation hearing in 1996, the court revoked the 1987 sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of 2V3 to 7 years to run consecutively to the 9-to-18-year Nassau County sentence. The Appellate Division affirmed.

We agree with the Appellate Division that the filing of a declaration of delinquency in 1991 tolled the expiration of the probationary sentence (Penal Law § 65.15 [2]). At the violation of probation hearing, defendant did not raise his current claim that the hearing was untimely under CPL 410.30. Thus, defendant’s argument is unpreserved for appellate review.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley and Rosenblatt concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

[808]*808In September 1987, defendant was convicted in Kings County on a charge of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree. Supreme Court sentenced him to five years probation and community service. Three and a half years into his probationary term, defendant violated his probation, absconded to Nassau County and was arrested and charged with two separate crimes. Defendant pleaded guilty to robbery in the first degree and in 1992 was sentenced as a second felony offender to 9 to 18 years in prison. In November 1991, Supreme Court, Kings County, issued a declaration of delinquency, and subsequently issued a warrant. After a violation of probation hearing in 1996, the court revoked the 1987 sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of 2V3 to 7 years to run consecutively to the 9-to-18-year Nassau County sentence. The Appellate Division affirmed.

We agree with the Appellate Division that the filing of a declaration of delinquency in 1991 tolled the expiration of the probationary sentence (Penal Law § 65.15 [2]). At the violation of probation hearing, defendant did not raise his current claim that the hearing was untimely under CPL 410.30. Thus, defendant’s argument is unpreserved for appellate review.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley and Rosenblatt concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

723 N.E.2d 54, 94 N.Y.2d 807, 701 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1999 N.Y. LEXIS 3728, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-douglas-ny-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack