People v. Jones
This text of 113 A.D.3d 635 (People v. Jones) 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
The defendant’s contention that the sentencing court failed to conduct an in-depth inquiry to determine his ability to pay restitution as a condition of his sentence of probation is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Dillon, 90 AD3d [636]*6361468, 1468-1469 [2011]; People v Harris, 72 AD3d 1110, 1112-1113 [2010]; People v Passalacqua, 43 AD3d 964, 964 [2007]; People v Taylor, 245 AD2d 398, 398-399 [1997]), and we decline to address the contention in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Lott and Austin, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
113 A.D.3d 635, 977 N.Y.2d 906, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jones-nyappdiv-2014.