THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. APPEAL NO (2015)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. FLOYD VANHOOSER, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.)

KA 12–01584

Decided: March 27, 2015

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, CARNI, AND SCONIERS, JJ.

FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (PHILIP ROTHSCHILD OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (JAMES P. MAXWELL OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the resentence so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant was convicted upon his plea of guilty of attempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25[2] ) and sentenced as a predicate felon to 7 years of incarceration and 5 years of postrelease supervision. County Court later resentenced defendant as a second violent felony offender to the same sentence, and defendant now appeals from the resentence. “Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the [81/212-year] gap between his original sentence and his resentence violated his statutory right to have his sentence pronounced ‘without unreasonable delay’ “ (People v. Smikle, 112 AD3d 1357, 1358, lv denied 22 NY3d 1141). We decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15[3] [c] ).

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network