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, etc., respondent, v. Bernard J. SEBASTIAN, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant, by permission, from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rienzi, J.), dated June 17, 2005, which denied, without a hearing, his motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate a judgment of the same court, rendered January 26, 2000, convicting him of assault in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence, or in the alternative to set aside the sentence pursuant to CPL 440.20.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed.
The defendant pleaded guilty to assault in the first degree in exchange for a promise that he would be sentenced to a determinate prison term of 15 years. He was sentenced to the promised term. Neither the sentencing minutes nor the court's order of commitment mentioned the imposition of any period of post-release supervision. Therefore, the sentence actually imposed by the court never included, and does not now include, any period of post-release supervision (see Hill v. U.S. ex rel. Wampler, 298 U.S. 460, 56 S.Ct. 760, 80 L.Ed. 1283; People v. Noble, 37 A.D.3d 622, 831 N.Y.S.2d 198; Earley v. Murray, 451 F.3d 71, rearg. denied 462 F.3d 147; but see People v. Sparber, 34 A.D.3d 265, 823 N.Y.S.2d 405). Because the defendant received exactly the sentence for which he bargained, he has failed to articulate any reason to vacate his judgment of conviction, upon his plea of guilty (cf. People v. Catu, 4 N.Y.3d 242, 792 N.Y.S.2d 887, 825 N.E.2d 1081) or to set aside his sentence. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of his motion pursuant to CPL article 440.
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.
Decided: March 06, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)