WASHINGTON, CHERISE C., PEOPLE v

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 3, 2014
DocketKA 12-02051
StatusPublished

This text of WASHINGTON, CHERISE C., PEOPLE v (WASHINGTON, CHERISE C., PEOPLE v) 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
WASHINGTON, CHERISE C., PEOPLE v, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1006 KA 12-02051 PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, WHALEN, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHERISE C. WASHINGTON, ALSO KNOWN AS CHERICE MORRIS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

LEANNE LAPP, PUBLIC DEFENDER, CANANDAIGUA (MICHAEL A. JONES, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

R. MICHAEL TANTILLO, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, CANANDAIGUA (JAMES B. RITTS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (Craig J. Doran, J.), rendered September 24, 2012. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree and petit larceny.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her upon her plea of guilty of burglary in the third degree (Penal Law § 140.20) and petit larceny (§ 155.25). Defendant contends that the delay following her initially scheduled sentencing date divested County Court of jurisdiction (see CPL 380.30 [1]; People v Drake, 61 NY2d 359, 366-367). Defendant failed to preserve her contention for our review inasmuch as she did not move to dismiss the indictment on that ground or otherwise object to the delay (see People v Dissottle, 68 AD3d 1542, 1543, lv denied 14 NY3d 799; see also People v Diggs, 98 AD3d 1255, 1256, lv denied 20 NY3d 986), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [3] [c]).

Entered: October 3, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

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

Related

People v. Drake
462 N.E.2d 376 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)
People v. Dissottle
68 A.D.3d 1542 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
People v. Diggs
98 A.D.3d 1255 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
WASHINGTON, CHERISE C., PEOPLE v, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/washington-cherise-c-people-v-nyappdiv-2014.