People v. Echavarria
This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 06133 (People v. Echavarria) 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.
Opinion
| People v Echavarria |
| 2024 NY Slip Op 06133 |
| Decided on December 05, 2024 |
| Appellate Division, First 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 and Entered: December 05, 2024
Before: Kern, J.P., Friedman, Kennedy, Scarpulla, Rosado, JJ.
Ind No. 2788/17 2883/17 Appeal No. 3157 Case No. 2019-04058
v
Sandra Echavarria, Defendant-Appellant.
Twyla Carter, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Nathan R. Brown of counsel), for appellant.
Darcel D. Clark, District Attorney, Bronx (Nicole Neckles of counsel), for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Villegas, J., at plea; Raymond Bruce, J., at sentencing), rendered May 30, 2019, convicting defendant, upon her pleas of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree (two counts), and sentencing her to concurrent jail terms of eight months, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's claim that the court improperly imposed the sentence without conducting an inquiry into the circumstances of defendant's failure to report to the TASC office for a drug treatment program is unpreserved because she neither requested further inquiry nor moved to withdraw her plea (see People v Stephens, 108 AD3d 414 [1st Dept 2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 1077 [2013]), and we decline to review her claim in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that defendant's violation of the terms of the plea agreement was properly based upon a letter from TASC's Deputy Director and the Project Director (see People v Fiammegta, 14 NY3d 90, 98 [2010]; People v Stephens, 108 AD3d at 414). Defendant did not dispute that she failed to comply with the terms of the plea agreement, and expressly consented to the imposition of the alternative jail sentence, which essentially constituted a sentence of time served.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: December 5, 2024
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2024 NY Slip Op 06133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-echavarria-nyappdiv-2024.