PEOPLE v. PERSON (2024)

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Laura R. Johnson, J.), rendered February 13, 2019, convicting him of attempted assault in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the final orders of protection issued at the time of sentencing should be vacated because the Supreme Court failed to state on the record its reasons for issuing those orders (see CPL 530.13[4];  People v. Moncrieft, 168 A.D.3d 982, 985, 92 N.Y.S.3d 335) is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2];  People v. Nieves, 2 N.Y.3d 310, 316–318, 778 N.Y.S.2d 751, 811 N.E.2d 13;  People v. Colon, 204 A.D.3d 938, 164 N.Y.S.3d 885;  People v. Rivera–Hernandez, 200 A.D.3d 721, 722, 154 N.Y.S.3d 838).  Under the circumstances, we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see People v. Colon, 204 A.D.3d at 939, 164 N.Y.S.3d 885;  People v. Rivera–Hernandez, 200 A.D.3d at 722, 154 N.Y.S.3d 838;  People v. Hagood–Fulson, 193 A.D.3d 973, 973, 142 N.Y.S.3d 853).  “[T]he better practice—and best use of judicial resources—is for a defendant seeking adjustment of [final orders of protection] to request relief from the issuing court in the first instance, resorting to appellate courts only if necessary” (People v. Nieves, 2 N.Y.3d at 317, 778 N.Y.S.2d 751, 811 N.E.2d 13;  see People v. Colon, 204 A.D.3d at 938, 164 N.Y.S.3d 885;  People v. Rivera–Hernandez, 200 A.D.3d at 722, 154 N.Y.S.3d 838).

MILLER, J.P., FORD, LOVE and GOLIA, JJ., concur.