Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Lagasse

NEW YORK SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FOURTH DEPARTMENT


December 30, 2009

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
v.
PRESTON M. LAGASSE, APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (William F. Kocher, J.), rendered April 18, 2008. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree.

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

As corrected through Wednesday, February 10, 2010

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by reducing the surcharge to 5% of the amount of restitution ordered and as modified the judgment is affirmed.

Memorandum

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.25). We reject the contention of defendant that he was not eligible for the initial period of interim probation supervision imposed by County Court (see CPL 390.30 [6]), inasmuch as he was a second felony offender. At the time of the entry of the plea, the court had not "found, pursuant to the provisions of the criminal procedure law," that defendant was a second felony offender (Penal Law § 70.06 [2]).

Contrary to defendant's further contention, the court did not err in calculating the amount of restitution. That amount was a condition of the plea bargain, and defendant specifically agreed to that amount during the plea allocution (see People v Hannan, 303 AD2d 765 [2003]). As the People correctly concede, however, the court erred in imposing a 10% surcharge on the amount of restitution ordered and instead should have imposed a surcharge of 5% (see Penal Law § 60.27 [8]; People v Viehdeffer, 288 AD2d 860 [2001]), and we therefore modify the judgment accordingly. Finally, we reject defendant's challenge to the severity of the sentence.

Present---Hurlbutt, J.P., Peradotto, Carni, Pine and Gorski, JJ.

20091230

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.