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. Miguel SALDANA, Appellant.
ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Defendant was charged in an accusatory instrument with sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65 [3]) and endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law § 260.10 [1]). For disposition purposes, the People moved, pursuant to CPL 180.50 (3) (a) (iii), to reduce the felony charge of sexual abuse in the first degree to the misdemeanor charge of sexual abuse in the second degree (Penal Law § 130.60 [1]). Thereafter, defendant pleaded guilty to sexual abuse in the second degree and the Criminal Court advised defendant that it would a enter civil judgment for the mandatory surcharge and DNA fee. At sentencing, the Criminal Court sentenced defendant to 364 days' imprisonment, issued a full order of protection, and, as pertinent to this appeal, again stated that it would enter a civil judgment for the mandatory surcharge and DNA fee.
On appeal, citing People v. Jones (26 N.Y.3d 730, 733 [2016]), defendant contends that the Criminal Court erred in directing payment of the mandatory surcharge and DNA fee by civil judgment without placing its reasons on the record or issuing a written order therefor. Defendant further argues that he did not ask the sentencing court to direct payment of the mandatory surcharge and fee by civil judgment, and that the sentencing court's action was not in defendant's favor (see CPL 470.15 [1]), because it harmed his credit and may affect his employment opportunities.
Defendant's claim is unpreserved for appellate review, as no objection was made at either the plea or sentencing proceedings (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v. Lettieri, 55 Misc. 3d 147[A], 2017 NY Slip Op. 50704[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud. Dists 2017], citing People v. Kamal, 144 AD3d 1055 [2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 1147 [2017]), and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
ALIOTTA, P.J., ELLIOT and TOUSSAINT, JJ., concur.
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: 2018-271 Q CR
Decided: April 24, 2020
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Term, 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)