People v. Thweatt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Thweatt

300 A.D.2d 1100, 751 N.Y.S.2d 892

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 30, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 300 A.D.2d 1100 (People v. Thweatt) 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. Thweatt, 300 A.D.2d 1100, 751 N.Y.S.2d 892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from [1101]*1101a judgment of Genesee County Court (Noonan, J.), entered September 7, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of attempted burglary in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Contrary to defendant’s contention, County Court was not required to specify a period of postrelease supervision at the time of the plea or at sentencing and thus resentencing is not required (see People v Bloom, 269 AD2d 838, lv denied 94 NY2d 945). Where, as here, the court fails to specify a shorter period, the period of postrelease supervision for the determinate sentence imposed upon defendant’s conviction of attempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25 [2]), a class D violent felony offense (§ 70.02 [1] [c]), is three years (see § 70.45 [2]; People v Skye, 298 AD2d 889; see also People v White, 296 AD2d 867). Present — Green, J.P., Pine, Hurlbutt, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from [1101]*1101a judgment of Genesee County Court (Noonan, J.), entered September 7, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of attempted burglary in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Contrary to defendant’s contention, County Court was not required to specify a period of postrelease supervision at the time of the plea or at sentencing and thus resentencing is not required (see People v Bloom, 269 AD2d 838, lv denied 94 NY2d 945). Where, as here, the court fails to specify a shorter period, the period of postrelease supervision for the determinate sentence imposed upon defendant’s conviction of attempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25 [2]), a class D violent felony offense (§ 70.02 [1] [c]), is three years (see § 70.45 [2]; People v Skye, 298 AD2d 889; see also People v White, 296 AD2d 867). Present — Green, J.P., Pine, Hurlbutt, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 1100, 751 N.Y.S.2d 892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-thweatt-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack