From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hannan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 31, 2003
303 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2001-01671

Submitted March 5, 2003.

March 31, 2003.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Hayes, J.), rendered January 23, 2001, convicting her of scheme to defraud in the first degree and grand larceny in the second degree (four counts), upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

David Goodman, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (David Steinberg of counsel), for appellant.

William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Bridget Rahilly Steller of counsel), for respondent.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, THOMAS A. ADAMS, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's challenges to the adequacy of the procedure utilized by the County Court in determining and imposing restitution are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v. Callahan, 80 N.Y.2d 273, 281; People v. Vazqueztell, 273 A.D.2d 328; People v. Bushati, 246 A.D.2d 663). In any event, her contentions are without merit, as the amount of restitution was a condition of her plea and she specifically agreed to that amount in her plea allocution (see People v. Vazqueztell, supra; People v. Bushati, supra).

ALTMAN, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Hannan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 31, 2003
303 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Hannan

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. TINA M. HANNAN, appellant

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

Date published: Mar 31, 2003

Citations

303 A.D.2d 765 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
757 N.Y.S.2d 439

Citing Cases

People v. Lagasse

Contrary to defendant's further contention, the court did not err in calculating the amount of restitution.…

People v. Cuddy

This contention is unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant had “ample opportunity to object” (…