From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hollenbach

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 3, 2003
307 A.D.2d 776 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Summary

In Hollenbach, the Fourth Department stated that "[b]ecause Penal Law § 70.45 (2) provides that the period of postrelease supervision on a conviction of a class C violent felony offense is five years, `unless the court specifies a shorter period,' there is no need for the court to specify a period of postrelease supervision at sentencing" (307 AD2d at 776 [citations omitted]).

Summary of this case from People v. Hill

Opinion

KA 02-01576

July 3, 2003.

Appeal from a judgment of Ontario County Court (Harvey, J.), entered September 12, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, burglary in the second degree.

DAVID M. PARKS, ITHACA, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

R. MICHAEL TANTILLO, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, CANANDAIGUA (JEFFREY L. TAYLOR OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., GREEN, GORSKI, LAWTON, AND HAYES, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

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

Memorandum:

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of burglary in the second degree (Penal Law 140.25) and petit larceny (155.25). Defendant did not move to withdraw his guilty plea or vacate the judgment of conviction and thus failed to preserve for our review his contention that the plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered because County Court failed to advise him at the time of the plea that he would be subject to a period of postrelease supervision ( see People v. Shumway, 295 A.D.2d 916, 917; People v. Minter, 295 A.D.2d 927, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 712). We decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see People v. Crump, 302 A.D.2d 901; People v. White, 296 A.D.2d 867, lv denied 99 N.Y.2d 540). We reject defendant's further contention that the judgment of conviction should be vacated because the court failed to specify a period of postrelease supervision at sentencing. "Postrelease supervision is mandatory for determinate sentences and is automatically included in the sentence" ( White, 296 A.D.2d at 867). Because Penal Law 70.45(2) provides that the period of postrelease supervision on a conviction of a class C violent felony offense is five years, "unless the court specifies a shorter period," there is no need for the court to specify a period of postrelease supervision at sentencing ( see Crump, 302 A.D.2d at 902; People v. Bloom, 269 A.D.2d 838, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 945). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.


Summaries of

People v. Hollenbach

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 3, 2003
307 A.D.2d 776 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

In Hollenbach, the Fourth Department stated that "[b]ecause Penal Law § 70.45 (2) provides that the period of postrelease supervision on a conviction of a class C violent felony offense is five years, `unless the court specifies a shorter period,' there is no need for the court to specify a period of postrelease supervision at sentencing" (307 AD2d at 776 [citations omitted]).

Summary of this case from People v. Hill

In People v Hollenbach (307 AD2d 776 [4th Dept., 2003]) it was stated that "[p]ost release supervision is mandatory for determinate sentences and is automatically included in the sentence. * * * [T]here is no need for the court to specify a period of postrelease supervision at sentencing" (Hollenbach, at 776, emphasis supplied, citations omitted).

Summary of this case from Matter of Highland v. Goord

In People v Hollenbach 307 AD2d 776 the Fourth Department continued its reasoning as set forth in People v Crump 302 AD2d 901 and People v White 296 AD2d 867, that "post release supervision is mandatory for determinate sentences and is automatically included in the sentence.

Summary of this case from MATTER OF SAPP v. PAYANT

In People v Hollenbach (307 AD2d 776 [4th Dept 2003]) it was stated that "[p]ostrelease supervision is mandatory for determinate sentences and is automatically included in the sentence.

Summary of this case from Quinones v. State of New York Department of Correctional Services
Case details for

People v. Hollenbach

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. SHAUNE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jul 3, 2003

Citations

307 A.D.2d 776 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
762 N.Y.S.2d 860

Citing Cases

Vazquez v. State

Here, claimant's confinement for parole violations occurred prior to the Court of Appeals decisions in Garner…

Quinones v. State of New York Department of Correctional Services

Under Penal Law § 70.45 (2), `[t]he length of the period of "post-release supervision" is five years . . .…