Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Timothy APPELL, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of aggravated criminal contempt (Penal Law § 215.52) in connection with the violation of a temporary order of protection issued by a local court in conjunction with the adjournment in contemplation of dismissal of an action wherein defendant was charged with harassment in the second degree (§ 240.26). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the temporary order of protection, which continued in effect for a period of one year, was void ab initio because it expired after the date to which the underlying action was adjourned (see CPL 470.05[2] ). In any event, that contention is without merit. Although the order adjourning the action in contemplation of dismissal stated that the underlying action was adjourned for six months, defendant was charged with a family offense (see 530.11[1] ), and thus the underlying action was adjourned for a period of one year by operation of law (see 170.55[2] ). Therefore, the temporary order of protection did not continue in effect beyond the date to which the underlying action was adjourned. Furthermore, defendant admitted during the plea allocution that he knew the temporary order of protection was in effect when he violated it by striking his wife. We reject defendant's contention that the negotiated sentence is unduly harsh or severe (see People v. Jiminez, 260 A.D.2d 723, 724, 687 N.Y.S.2d 824).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 15, 2002
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)