SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
June 8, 2012
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
JASON M. MEDEN,
Appeal from a judgment of the Niagara County Court (Matthew J. Murphy, III, J.), rendered April 12, 2011.
People v Meden
Appellate Division, Fourth 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 June 8, 2012
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, FAHEY, LINDLEY, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.
The judgment revoked defendant's sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by vacating the sentence and as
modified the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to Niagara County Court for resentencing in accordance with the
following Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment revoking the sentence of probation previously imposed and
convicting him of violating the terms and conditions of his probation. He was sentenced to a determinate term of incarceration
of three years, to be followed by three years of postrelease supervision. We reject defendant's challenge to the severity of the sentence,
but we conclude that the sentence imposed is illegal and cannot stand despite the failure of either defendant or the People to raise the
issue in County Court or on appeal (see People v Davis, 37 AD3d 1179, 1180, lv denied 8 NY3d 983). Defendant pleaded guilty to attempted
assault in the second degree, a class E felony and, although he was convicted of rape in the second degree in 2007, there is no indication
in the record that he was adjudicated a second felony offender. Defendant therefore faced an indeterminate term of incarceration ranging
from a minimum of 1 to 3 years to a maximum of 1⅓ to 4 years (see Penal Law § 70.00  [e];  [b]). However, the court erroneously
imposed a sentence of a determinate term of three years. The certificate of conviction correctly reflects that defendant was convicted of attempted
assault in the second degree but it also reflects the illegal sentence. We therefore modify the judgment by vacating the sentence imposed, and we
remit the matter to County Court for resentencing.
Entered: June 8, 2012
Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.