People v. Prihett

• Citation: 718 N.Y.S.2d 840,279 A.D.2d 335
• Court: New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
• Decision Date: 16 January 2001
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>DWAYNE PRIHETT, Appellant.

279 A.D.2d 335

718 N.Y.S.2d 840

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,

v.DWAYNE PRIHETT, Appellant.

Decided January 16, 2001.

Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.

Defendant's claim that the court's imposition of the mandatory surcharge (Penal Law § 60.35) without mentioning such surcharge during the plea colloquy constituted a violation of his plea bargain is unpreserved as a result of defendant's failure to move to withdraw his plea on this ground or to object to the surcharge, and we decline to review this claim in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find no indication in the record that defendant's guilty plea was made in reliance on a promise that the surcharge would not be imposed. We also note that the surcharge, unlike a fine, is mandatory (CPL 420.35 [2]). We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims.