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.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Samuel MELENDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Brenda Soloff, J., at plea, first sentence and motion to set aside sentence; James Yates, J., at second felony offender adjudication, and Harold Beeler, J., at resentence), rendered November 30, 1994, convicting defendant of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 3 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.
Since defendant is a second felony offender, the 1-year sentence imposed in 1992 was illegal (see, People v. May, 180 A.D.2d 974, 580 N.Y.S.2d 556), and defendant therefore had no legitimate expectation of the finality of that sentence (see, People v. Williams, 87 N.Y.2d 1014, 643 N.Y.S.2d 469, 666 N.E.2d 174). Defendant's deceptive use of aliases and failure to correct the court's misinformation as to his prior record during the plea and sentence proceedings concealed his predicate felon status (see, People v. Holley, 168 A.D.2d 992, 993, 565 N.Y.S.2d 351; People v. Barnes, 160 A.D.2d 342, 553 N.Y.S.2d 413). Under the circumstances, defendant's rights under the double jeopardy provisions of the Federal and State Constitutions were not violated when the People made a timely motion to set aside the illegal sentence (CPL 440.40) and the court imposed a lawful sentence, irrespective of whether the illegal sentence had already been completed. We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: October 08, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First 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)