People v. Pilgrim
Opinion
| People v Pilgrim |
| 2022 NY Slip Op 02290 |
| Decided on April 6, 2022 |
| 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 April 6, 2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P.
ANGELA G. IANNACCI
JOSEPH J. MALTESE
LARA J. GENOVESI, JJ.
2018-13713
v
Judah Pilgrim, appellant.
Patricia Pazner, New York, NY (Michael Arthus of counsel), for appellant.
Melinda Katz, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, NY (Johnnette Traill and Christopher Blira-Koessler of counsel; Jordan Miller on the memorandum), for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Ushir Pandit-Durant, J., at plea; Gia L. Morris, J., at sentence), imposed October 4, 2018, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the period of postrelease supervision imposed as part of the sentence was excessive.
ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the period of postrelease supervision imposed as part of the sentence was not excessive (see People v Suitte , 90 AD2d 80).
DUFFY, J.P., IANNACCI, MALTESE and GENOVESI, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Maria T. Fasulo
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
204 A.D.3d 702 (People v. Pilgrim) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.