Opinion
No. 792 KA 20-00761
11-17-2023
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. JAMES D. PASCALAR, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
JULIE CIANCA, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (TONYA PLANK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NANCY GILLIGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
JULIE CIANCA, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (TONYA PLANK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NANCY GILLIGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CURRAN, MONTOUR, OGDEN, AND NOWAK, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Judith A. Sinclair, J.), rendered January 28, 2020. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of endangering the welfare of a vulnerable elderly person or an incompetent or physically disabled person in the second degree, identity theft in the first degree and criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of endangering the welfare of a vulnerable elderly person or an incompetent or physically disabled person in the second degree (Penal Law § 260.32 [4]), identity theft in the first degree (§ 190.80 [1]), and criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (§ 170.25). Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal is invalid (see People v. Blackshear, 208 A.D.3d 1635, 1636 [4th Dept 2022], lv denied 39 N.Y.3d 961 [2022]; see generally People v. Thomas, 34 N.Y.3d 545, 565-566 [2019], cert denied - U.S. -, 140 S.Ct. 2634 [2020]) and thus does not preclude our review of his challenge to the severity of his sentence (see People v. Alls, 187 A.D.3d 1515, 1515 [4th Dept 2020]), we conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.