From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

PEOPLE v. LA VALLEY

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 25, 2000
272 A.D.2d 786 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Decided and Entered: May 25, 2000.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Nicandri, J.), rendered April 20, 1999, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

Richard V. Manning, Parishville, for appellant.

Jerome J. Richards, District Attorney (Rosemary R. Philips of counsel), Canton, for respondent.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Peters, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


In satisfaction of a two-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of driving while intoxicated and waived his right to appeal. County Court postponed sentencing for an 11-month period during which defendant was required to complete an alcohol rehabilitation program and refrain from consuming alcohol. Defendant subsequently admitted to consuming alcohol during that period and, following a sentencing hearing, was sentenced to a 1 to 4-year prison term and ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $1,158.23, representing the cost of extraditing defendant from Florida for his arraignment. Defendant appeals.

Initially, by waiving his right to appeal defendant waived his right to challenge whether the requirement that he complete an alcohol rehabilitation program and comply with other directives during the period that his sentence was deferred constituted an impermissible term of "interim probation" (see, People v. Sparrow, 222 A.D.2d 1114, lv denied 87 N.Y.2d 977). Nevertheless, were we to review the argument, we would find that County Court did not place defendant on illegal "interim probation" or violate his due process rights by imposing sentence when defendant failed to comply with a condition which was specifically explained to him by the court (see, People v. Brown, 88 N.Y.2d 944; People v. Avery, 85 N.Y.2d 503, 507; People v. McNeil, 244 A.D.2d 998, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 928).

We are, however, persuaded by defendant's argument that County Court, 85 N.Y.2d 503, 507; erred in imposing restitution to cover the cost of defendant's extradition, 85 N.Y.2d 503, 507; from Florida. The cost of extradition is included among the St. Lawrence, 85 N.Y.2d 503, 507; County's normal law enforcement operating costs (see, People v. Watson, 197, 507; A.D.2d 880) and is not considered an "actual out-of-pocket loss caused [by, 197, 507; defendant's offense]" (Penal Law § 60.27). Moreover, the County is not considered to be a "victim" of defendant's crime so as to be entitled to restitution (see, Penal Law § 60.27, [4] [b]; see also, People v. La Fave, 265 A.D.2d 740, 742;People v. Storm, 177 A.D.2d 767).

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is modified, on the law, by reversing so much thereof as directed defendant to pay restitution in the amount of $1,158.23, and, as so modified, affirmed.


Summaries of

PEOPLE v. LA VALLEY

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 25, 2000
272 A.D.2d 786 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

PEOPLE v. LA VALLEY

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAVID J. LA VALLEY…

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

Date published: May 25, 2000

Citations

272 A.D.2d 786 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
708 N.Y.S.2d 916

Citing Cases

People v. Pelkey

The award of extradition costs as part of the restitution was also unsupported by law. Extradition costs are…

People v. Gemmill

Defendant appeals, contending that the interim probation was illegal and that County Court violated his due…