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.

The People of the State of New York, Sci. v. Rhea Pisciotta

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts Appellate Division, First Department


April 4, 2013

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, SCI.
RESPONDENT,
v.
RHEA PISCIOTTA, ALSO KNOWN AS ALYSSA VACCA,
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Adrienne M. Gantt. of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Yuval Simchi-Levi of counsel), for respondent.

People v Pisciotta

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 April 4, 2013

Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Abdus-Salaam, Gische, JJ.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J. at plea; Marcy L. Kahn, J. at sentencing), rendered August 5, 2010, convicting defendant of assault in the second and third degrees, and sentencing her, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of four years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant's claim that the court improperly enhanced her bargained-for sentence without sufficient inquiry is unpreserved since defendant neither requested a hearing nor moved to withdraw her plea (see e.g. People v Malaj, 69 AD3d 487 [1st Dept 2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 776 [2010]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternate holding, we find that the court conducted a sufficient inquiry and properly imposed an enhanced sentence based on reliable information that defendant violated the terms of her plea agreement (see People v Jenkins, 11 NY3d 282 [2008]). There were no disputed factual issues that required a hearing as a matter of due process (see People v Valencia, 3 NY3d 714 [2004]; compare Torres v Berbary, 340 F3d 63 [2d Cir 2003]). The record also establishes that defendant was sufficiently warned of the meaning and consequences of absconding from her drug program.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: APRIL 4, 2013

CLERK

20130404

© 1992-2013 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.