People v. BakerPeople v. Baker
- Reporters:
- ,
On a prior appeal to this Court, the defendant argued that he was punished for exercising his right to a jury trial, as the sentence imposed was greater than the sentence offered as part of a potential plea agreement. The plea agreement was rejected by the County Court on the ground that it did not take into account the defendant‘s correct predicate status for sentencing purposes. This Court affirmed the sentence imposed (see People v Baker, 287 AD2d 726 [2001]).
The defendant moved to set aside his sentence pursuant to
The defendant is not procedurally barred from arguing that he should not have been adjudicated a persistent violent felony offender since the issue the defendant raises here is distinct from the issue raised on his appeal from the sentence imposed on his original conviction (see People v Barnes, 60 AD3d 861 [2009]). In addition, the defendant‘s contentions required a hearing (see People v Perron, 273 AD2d 549 [2000]).
Further, a hearing was required to determine the merits of the defendant‘s contention that he did not receive the effective assistance of counsel because trial counsel did not properly investigate his criminal history (see People v Mobley, 59 AD3d 741 [2009]; People v Garcia, 19 AD3d 17 [2005]; People v Perron, 273 AD2d 549 [2000]). Covello, J.P., Leventhal, Lott and Miller, JJ., concur.