People v. Pons
| Decision Date | 09 November 1987 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Conroy PONS, a/k/a Louis Vasquez and Conrado Pons, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Bennett M. Epstein, New York City (Isabelle A. Kirshner, of counsel), for appellant.
Peter L. Zimroth, Corp. Counsel, New York City (Pamela Seider Dolgow and John Hogrogian, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MANGANO, J.P., and BROWN, LAWRENCE and SPATT, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.), rendered March 13, 1986, adjudicating him to be in violation of probation, upon his plea of guilty, and resentencing him to a term of imprisonment.
ORDERED that the amended judgment is affirmed.
Under the circumstances herein, the court properly adjudicated the defendant in violation of probation based upon his plea of guilty, made through his defense counsel in open court and in the defendant's presence (see, CPL 410.70; People v. Lombardo, 108 A.D.2d 873, 874, 485 N.Y.S.2d 370; cf., People v. Sadness, 300 N.Y. 69, 89 N.E.2d 188, cert. denied 338 U.S. 952, 70 S.Ct. 483, 94 L.Ed. 587; People v. Bellis, 78 A.D.2d 1014, 433 N.Y.S.2d 661).
The defendant's further contention that the court resentenced him without an updated presentence report from the Probation Department is equally without merit. The record clearly indicates that the court had considered the violation of probation report submitted by the Probation Department which was "the functional equivalent of an updated report because it inform[ed] the court of all 'relevant changes which [had] occurred since preparation of the original presentencing report' " (People v. Jackson, 106 A.D.2d 93, 98, 483 N.Y.S.2d 725, quoting from People v. Halaby, 77 A.D.2d 717, 718, 430 N.Y.S.2d 717; see, People v. Goon, 124 A.D.2d 347, 507 N.Y.S.2d 288, lv. denied 69 N.Y.2d 711, 504 N.E.2d 405).
Finally, we find no basis in the record warranting modification of the new sentence imposed or the recusal of the Criminal Term Justice.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Simpson
...N.Y.S.2d 741; People v. Roman, 153 A.D.2d 594, 544 N.Y.S.2d 384; People v. Sanchez, 143 A.D.2d 377, 532 N.Y.S.2d 320; People v. Pons, 134 A.D.2d 378, 520 N.Y.S.2d 855; People v. Rice, 125 A.D.2d 611, 509 N.Y.S.2d 433; People v. Randolphe, 114 A.D.2d 426, 494 N.Y.S.2d 142; People v. Jackson,......
-
People v. Mannina
...310) and, in any event, without merit ( see People v. Kuey, 83 N.Y.2d 278, 282, 609 N.Y.S.2d 568, 631 N.E.2d 574; cf. People v. Pons, 134 A.D.2d 378, 378–379, 520 N.Y.S.2d 855). The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).SKELOS, J.P., ANGI......
-
People v. Holt
...where defendant, represented by counsel and present in court, pleaded guilty to the probation violation charge. People v. Pons, 134 A.D.2d 378, 520 N.Y.S.2d 855 (2d Dept.). ...
-
People v. Smith
...of probation based upon his plea of guilty (see, CPL 410.70; People v. Lombardo, 108 A.D.2d 873, 874, 485 N.Y.S.2d 370; People v. Pons, 134 A.D.2d 378, 520 N.Y.S.2d 855). We find no basis for concluding that the sentence, which was the product of a negotiated plea, requires modification in ......