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. DONALD SWICK, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal from the judgment insofar as it imposed sentence is unanimously dismissed and the judgment is affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment revoking his sentence of probation imposed upon his conviction, following his plea of guilty, of attempted use of a child in a sexual performance (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 263.05), and imposing a sentence of imprisonment. “Inasmuch as defendant has completed serving the sentence imposed, his contention that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe has been rendered moot” (People v. Anderson, 66 AD3d 1431, 1431, lv. denied 13 NY3d 905 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v. Benson, 6 AD3d 1173, 1173, lv denied 3 NY3d 636).
Defendant further contends that County Court violated his due process rights by revoking his probationary sentence based on a de minimis violation of the terms and conditions of probation. At no time during the probation revocation proceedings did defendant raise any challenge to the allegedly “de minimis” nature of the violation or raise any due process challenge to the proceeding. We thus conclude that defendant's contention is not preserved for our review (see People v. Ebert, 18 AD3d 963, 964; People v. Villar, 10 AD3d 564, 564, lv denied 3 NY3d 761; see generally CPL 470.05[2] ). In any event, we conclude that defendant's admitted “violation of probation was [neither] de minimis nor a mere technicality” (People v. Cummings, 134 AD3d 1566, 1566, lv. denied 27 NY3d 995; see People v. Burton, 234 A.D.2d 972, 973, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1033).
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: KA 11–02373
Decided: February 03, 2017
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
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)