People v. Kuchma

2024 NY Slip Op 04622
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 26, 2024
DocketInd No. 4410/15 91/16 Appeal No. 2626-2626A Case No. 2017-1445
StatusPublished

This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 04622 (People v. Kuchma) 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. Kuchma, 2024 NY Slip Op 04622 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

People v Kuchma (2024 NY Slip Op 04622)
People v Kuchma
2024 NY Slip Op 04622
Decided on September 26, 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: September 26, 2024
Before: Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Friedman, Kapnick, Shulman, Pitt-Burke, JJ.

Ind No. 4410/15 91/16 Appeal No. 2626-2626A Case No. 2017-1445

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

v

Justin Kuchma, Defendant-Appellant.


Twyla Carter, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Laura Boyd of counsel), for appellant.

Alvin L. Bragg, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Hunter Baehren of counsel), for respondent.



Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald Zweibel, J.), rendered August 11, 2016, as amended September 25, 2016, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of criminal contempt in the first degree, aggravated criminal contempt, aggravated family offense, stalking in the second degree, and aggravated harassment in the second degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 1 to 3 years, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to vacate the provisions of the orders of protection solely to the extent that the orders direct that they remain in effect until August 10, 2027, and to remand the matter for a new determination of the expiration of the orders, and otherwise affirmed.

Although defendant's challenge to the duration of the orders of protection is unpreserved (see People v Nieves, 2 NY3d 310 [2004]), we reach the issue in the interest of justice. As the People concede, the expiration date of the orders of protection is incorrect because it was calculated without taking into account the jail time credit to which defendant is entitled (see e.g. People v Natal, 200 AD3d 620 [2021]). Pending a new determination, the orders of protection shall remain in effect.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: September 26, 2024



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

Related

People v. Nieves
811 N.E.2d 13 (New York Court of Appeals, 2004)
People v. Natal
2021 NY Slip Op 07525 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2024 NY Slip Op 04622, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kuchma-nyappdiv-2024.