People v. Hampton

2020 NY Slip Op 04766, 127 N.Y.S.3d 327, 186 A.D.3d 855

• Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
• Decided: August 26, 2020
• Docket: Ind. No. 1238/16
• Status: Published

Opinion

People v Hampton (2020 NY Slip Op 04766)

People v Hampton

2020 NY Slip Op 04766

Decided on August 26, 2020

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 August 26, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
SHERI S. ROMAN
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

2017-12114
(Ind. No. 1238/16)

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

v

James Hampton, appellant.

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY (David P. Greenberg of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Sarah G. Pitts of counsel; Marielle Burnett on the memorandum), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (William Miller, J.), rendered August 7, 2017, convicting him of criminal contempt in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal contempt in the first degree. On appeal, the defendant contends that the duration of an order of protection, issued at the time of sentencing, should be modified.

The defendant's challenge to the duration of the order of protection is unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not raise this issue at sentencing or move to amend the order of protection on this ground (see People v Carmichael, 170 AD3d 742, 743; People v Rodriguez, 157 AD3d 971). Under the circumstances, we decline to reach this contention in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. "[T]he better practice—and best use of judicial resources—is for a defendant seeking adjustment of [an order of protection] to request relief from the issuing court in the first instance, resorting to the appellate courts only if necessary" (People v Nieves, 2 NY3d 310, 317; see People v Daniel A., 183 AD3d 909, 910; People v Carmichael, 170 AD3d at 743).

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

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court