People v. Portillo

• Decision Date: 14 July 2021
• Docket Number: Ind. No. 4488/18,2019–03868
• Citation: 196 A.D.3d 605,147 N.Y.S.3d 455 (Mem)
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Angel PORTILLO, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

196 A.D.3d 605
147 N.Y.S.3d 455 (Mem)

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Angel PORTILLO, appellant.

2019–03868
Ind. No. 4488/18

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted—June 23, 2021
July 14, 2021

Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Sam Feldman of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Solomon Neubort of counsel; Marielle Burnett on the memorandum), for respondent.

MARK C. DILLON, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, BETSY BARROS, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Matthew J. D'Emic, J.), rendered March 20, 2019, convicting him of criminal trespass in the second degree (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the duration of the order of protection exceeded the maximum statutory duration because it failed to take into account the defendant's jail-time credit for the period he was incarcerated while the criminal action was pending is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v. Nieves, 2 N.Y.3d 310, 316–318, 778 N.Y.S.2d 751, 811 N.E.2d 13 ; People v. Flores, 178 A.D.3d 726, 111 N.Y.S.3d 242 ). Moreover, "[b]ecause sentencing courts are in the best position to amend permanent orders of protection, the better practice—and best use of judicial resources—is for a defendant seeking adjustment of such an order to request relief from the issuing court in the first instance, resorting to the appellate courts only if necessary" ( People v. Nieves, 2 N.Y.3d at 317, 778 N.Y.S.2d 751, 811 N.E.2d 13 ). Under the circumstances presented, we decline to review the defendant's unpreserved contention in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see People v. DeRobertis, 191 A.D.3d 898, 138 N.Y.S.3d 919 ; People v. Flores, 178 A.D.3d at 726, 111 N.Y.S.3d 242 ; People v. Casanova, 177 A.D.3d 582, 109 N.Y.S.3d 904 ).

DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, BARROS, BRATHWAITE NELSON and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.