People v. Tomasula

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tomasula

24 A.D.3d 159, 805 N.Y.S.2d 339

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

DecidedDecember 6, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.3d 159 (People v. Tomasula) 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. Tomasula, 24 A.D.3d 159, 805 N.Y.S.2d 339 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Renee A. White, J.), rendered June 4, 2002, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of eight years, unanimously reversed, on the law, the judgment vacated and the matter remanded for further proceedings. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered on or about February 11, 2004, which denied defendant’s CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment of conviction, unanimously dismissed as academic.

As the People concede, the court’s failure to advise defendant that his sentence would include a mandatory period of postrelease supervision rendered his plea invalid (see People v Catu, 4 NY3d 242 [2005]). In light of this determination, we do not reach any other issues. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Renee A. White, J.), rendered June 4, 2002, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of eight years, unanimously reversed, on the law, the judgment vacated and the matter remanded for further proceedings. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered on or about February 11, 2004, which denied defendant’s CPL 440.10 motion to vacate the judgment of conviction, unanimously dismissed as academic.

As the People concede, the court’s failure to advise defendant that his sentence would include a mandatory period of postrelease supervision rendered his plea invalid (see People v Catu, 4 NY3d 242 [2005]). In light of this determination, we do not reach any other issues. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.3d 159, 805 N.Y.S.2d 339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tomasula-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack