PEOPLE v. LAVAUD (2025)

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Matthew J. D'Emic, J.), rendered December 6, 2022, convicting him of criminal mischief in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the order of protection issued at the time of sentencing should be vacated because the Supreme Court failed to state on the record the reasons for issuing it (see CPL 530.13[4]) is unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant failed to object to the order of protection at sentencing or otherwise raise the issue before the court (see id. § 470.05[2];  People v. Nieves, 2 N.Y.3d 310, 316–317, 778 N.Y.S.2d 751, 811 N.E.2d 13;  People v. Beaubrun, 234 A.D.3d 869, 869, 225 N.Y.S.3d 360).  Under the circumstances, we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to review this contention (see People v. Villan, 234 A.D.3d 717, 717, 224 N.Y.S.3d 537;  People v. Person, 233 A.D.3d 804, 804, 221 N.Y.S.3d 671).  “[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 the 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. Person, 233 A.D.3d at 804, 221 N.Y.S.3d 671).

GENOVESI, J.P., CHAMBERS, TAYLOR and HOM, JJ., concur.