PEOPLE v. CHAMBERS (2007)

Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, Bronx County (David Stadtmauer, J.), rendered March 10, 2006, resentencing defendant, as a persistent violent felony offender, to a term of 25 years to life, upon his conviction, after a jury trial, of manslaughter in the first degree, unanimously affirmed.

 After this Court rejected defendant's original appeal from his conviction (305 A.D.2d 193, 758 N.Y.S.2d 799 [2003], lv. denied 100 N.Y.2d 579, 764 N.Y.S.2d 389, 796 N.E.2d 481 [2003] ), the trial court granted, on grounds not at issue on the present appeal, defendant's CPL 440.20 motion to set aside sentence, and ordered resentencing, including new proceedings on defendant's persistent violent felony offender status.   Defendant contested whether, in fact, he had two or more prior violent felony convictions, and the court conducted an evidentiary hearing on that issue.   The evidence established, beyond a reasonable doubt, defendant's identity as the person named in the certificates of conviction.   Even assuming, without deciding, that resort to the testimony of a fingerprint comparison expert was necessary in the first place (but see CPL 60.60), we find that the court properly qualified the fingerprint examiner as an expert and accepted his testimony (see e.g. People v. Guzman, 4 A.D.3d 196, 772 N.Y.S.2d 55 [2004];  People v. Paun, 269 A.D.2d 546, 703 N.Y.S.2d 256 [2000], lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 801, 711 N.Y.S.2d 169, 733 N.E.2d 241 [2000] ).   Defendant's arguments to the contrary are without merit.

 The procedure under which defendant was sentenced as a persistent violent felony offender was not unconstitutional.   Defendant was not entitled to a jury determination of the existence of his prior convictions.   We see no reason to limit the rule of Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 [1998] to situations where the fact of a prior conviction is undisputed.