From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Arthur

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 19, 1996
234 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

December 19, 1996.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Main, Jr., J.), rendered February 27, 1995, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mikoll, White, Casey and Spain, JJ.


Defendant, who pleaded guilty to attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree and was sentenced as a second felony offender to a prison term of 1½ to 3 years to run consecutive to the sentence he was serving, claims that County Court erred in denying his motion to waive the $150 mandatory surcharge imposed pursuant to Penal Law § 60.35 (1) (a).

Initially, we reject defendant's contention that the imposition of the mandatory surcharge and resulting garnishment of his inmate fund to pay the surcharge is unconstitutional ( see, e.g., People v Barnes, 62 NY2d 702, 703; People v Ramirez, 208 AD2d 381, lv denied 84 NY2d 1037; see also, Penal Law § 60.35). Moreover, inasmuch as defendant has not completed his term of imprisonment and may pay such amount from his earnings while in prison or from funds in his inmate account, we find that his request for waiver of the mandatory surcharge is premature ( see, People v Burke, 222 AD2d 837, 838; People v Ramirez, supra; People v Mejia, 191 AD2d 844, lv denied 81 NY2d 1017).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Arthur

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 19, 1996
234 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Arthur

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EUPHRATES ARTHUR…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Dec 19, 1996

Citations

234 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
651 N.Y.S.2d 672

Citing Cases

People v. Hopkins

The "various other methods" would presumably encompass deferrals. "It has been repeatedly held that Penal Law…

People v. Hopkins

The "various other methods" would presumably encompass deferrals. "It has been repeatedly held that Penal Law…