People v. Pickett, 90 A.D.3d 1526 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2011). · Go Syfert
People v. Pickett, 90 A.D.3d 1526 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2011). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Cited for
At page 1527 Vacating sentence for unagreed-upon restitution enhancement3 citing cases“We therefore modify the judgment by vacating the sentence, and we remit the matter to County Court to impose the promised sentence or to afford defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea (see Pett, 74 AD3d 1891; Hunter, 72 AD3d 1536).”the opinion's own words at *1527 · 2 listed here
  • Spencer, IV, Henry S., People v., 134 A.D.3d 1553 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2015).published
    We agree with defendant, however, that the court erred in enhancing his sentence by imposing restitution without affording him the opportunity to withdraw his plea, inasmuch as restitution was not a part of the plea agreement (see People v…
  • People v. Smith, 101 A.D.3d 1677 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2012).published 2 cites
    We agree with defendant that the court erred in enhancing the sentence by imposing a IV2-year period of postrelease supervision that was not included in the plea agreement (see generally People v Pickett, 90 AD3d 1526, 1527 [2011]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Clifford K. Pickett
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 23, 2011.
Published opinion
90 A.D.3d 1526
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously modified as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and on the law by vacating the sentence and as modified the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to Jefferson County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: On a prior appeal, we affirmed the judgment convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the second degree under Penal Law § 125.15 (1) (People v Pickett, 49 AD3d 1207 [2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 963 [2008] ). We subsequently granted defendant’s motion for a writ of error coram nobis on the ground that appellate counsel had failed to raise an issue on appeal that may have merit, i.e., that County Court erred in ordering restitution inasmuch as it was not part of the plea bargain (People v Pickett, 67 AD3d 1458 [2009] ), and we vacated our prior order. We now consider the appeal de novo.

[*1527] We agree with defendant that the court erred in enhancing the sentence by imposing restitution inasmuch as restitution was not included in the plea bargain (see People v Pett, 74 AD3d 1891 [2010]; People v Hunter, 72 AD3d 1536 [2010]; People v Cooke, 21 AD3d 1339 [2005]). Although defendant failed to preserve his contention for our review (see Hunter, 72 AD3d 1536; Cooke, 21 AD3d 1339), we nevertheless exercise our power to review it as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). We therefore modify the judgment by vacating the sentence, and we remit the matter to County Court to impose the promised sentence or to afford defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea (see Pett, 74 AD3d 1891; Hunter, 72 AD3d 1536). In view of our determination, we need not address defendant’s remaining contention. Present — Scudder, PJ., Centra, Fahey, Garni and Sconiers, JJ.