People v. Thomas, 63 A.D.3d 642

63 A.D.3d 642

N.Y. App. Div.

2009

Murphy v. New York, 55 AD3d 319 (2008) and People v. Marte, 44 AD3d 442 (2007) cases appear in the text, but the main opinion starts at “THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK...“. I will skip the partial content at the top and convert the main opinion starting with the caption. Actually, the instructions say: “If the document contains multiple opinions (e.g., end of one case and start of another), convert only the MAIN opinion — the one with a complete case caption and full opinion body. Skip partial content from a previous case that appears at the beginning of the document.” The top part of page 642 is clearly the end of a previous case (People v. unknown, though it mentions People v. Franco and People v. Marte in citations). The main case starts with the caption for “THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK... v DONNELL THOMAS...“. Wait, looking closer at the image, there is a horizontal black bar separating the end of one case and the start of the next. Case Information for the main case: Name: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK v DONNELL THOMAS, Also Known as RAYMOND RODRIGUEZ Short Name: People v. Thomas Docket: 882 NYS2d 99 (This is a citation, but often used as an identifier in these reporter pages. Actually, the docket isn‘t explicitly listed in “No.” format, but the citation 882 NYS2d 99 is provided in brackets). Court: Supreme Court, Bronx County (Wait, the opinion is from the Appellate Division, First Department, based on the judges listed like Mazzarelli, J.P. The “Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County...” is the judgment being reviewed). In NY Reports, the page 642 header usually indicates the court. Given the JJ listed, it‘s AD 1st Dept. Date: 2007-09-06 (This is the judgment date. The appellate decision date isn‘t explicitly on this page, though the year 2008 or 2009 is likely. However, the metadata should reflect what is in the text). Citation: 882 NYS2d 99 Let‘s refine: Case Information: Name: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v DONNELL THOMAS, Also Known as RAYMOND RODRIGUEZ, Appellant. Short Name: People v. Thomas Docket: Court: App. Div. (based on judges listed) Date: Citation: 882 NYS2d 99 Actually, looking at the layout, “642” is the page number. Page markers: I will start with the Case Information block for People v. Thomas. The footer/header info: 642. The first case ends at “...DeGrasse and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.” The main case starts after the black bar. Caption: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v DONNELL THOMAS, Also Known as RAYMOND RODRIGUEZ, Appellant. [882 NYS2d 99] Judgment info follows. Content: Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John P. Collins, J.), rendered September 6, 2007, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 to 8 years, unanimously affirmed. ... Judges at the end: Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Catterson, DeGrasse and Abdus-Salaam, JJ. Let‘s check for footnotes. None. Let‘s check for citations. People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662 [1988] People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543 [1993] Boykin v Alabama (395 US 238 [1969]) The start of the page (top) is the end of another case. I skip it. Wait, looking at the OCR: “The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Donnell Thomas, Also Known as Raymond Rodriguez, Appellant. [882 NYS2d 99]” The court is not explicitly stated in the caption but is clearly NY Appellate Division, First Department (standard for these reporter pages with those judges). Short Name: People v. Thomas Cite: 882 N.Y.S.2d 99 Let‘s begin.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v DONNELL THOMAS, Also Known as RAYMOND RODRIGUEZ, Appellant.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

882 N.Y.S.2d 99

Pagination: The OCR starts with 642. The main case starts on page 642. Reflowing hyphenated words: unanimously (unani- mously) -> unanimously alternative (alterna- tive) -> alternative voluntarily (volun- tarily) -> voluntarily qualifying (qualify- ing) -> qualifying defendant‘s (defen- dant‘s) -> defendant‘s One detail: The OCR shows “John E Collins” but the image shows “John P. Collins“. I will use the image text (verbatim). OCR says “J.E” but image says “J.P.“. Final check on citations: People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662 [1988] People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543 [1993] Boykin v Alabama (395 US 238 [1969]) Citations in the text: Ready. Wait, looking at the page, the top part is the end of another case. “or about June 5, 2007, which denied defendant‘s motion to be resentenced...” This is the conclusion of a case. The main case starts with the black bar and “THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK...“. I will follow the rule: “Skip partial content from a previous case that appears at the beginning of the document.” One more check on the judges: “Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Catterson, DeGrasse and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.” The OCR says “J.E“, but looking at the image, it‘s definitely “J.P.” (Justice Presiding). The case info: Short name: People v. Thomas Docket: Not provided in standard form, but the citation is 882 NYS2d 99. Court: N.Y. App. Div. (1st Dept is inferred but N.Y. App. Div. is the standard Bluebook abbreviation). The judgment date: September 6, 2007. The text: Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John P. Collins, J.), rendered September 6, 2007, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 to 8 years, unanimously affirmed. Next paragraph: Defendant‘s unpreserved challenges to the validity of his plea do not come within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662 [1988]), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we also reject them on the merits. The record establishes that defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily pleaded guilty (see People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543 [1993]). Defendant pleaded guilty twice in this case, and the second plea differed from the first only to the extent of reducing the degree of the crime for defendant‘s benefit, thereby qualifying him for a more lenient sentence than the one to which he had originally agreed. The second plea proceeding validly incorporated by reference the full allocution, including defendant‘s rights under Boykin v Alabama (395 US 238 [1969]), that had been conducted at the first plea proceeding. Next paragraph: Defendant‘s claim that the court should have conducted an inquiry into the circumstances of his failure to complete a drug program is also unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we also reject it on the merits. Next paragraph: We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Catterson, DeGrasse and Abdus-Salaam, JJ. One minor point: the OCR has “unani mously” and “alterna tive“. I will fix those hyphenations/line-break issues. Actually, the word “alterna-tive” is split in the image. “volun-tarily” is split. “qualify-ing” is split. “defen-dant‘s” is split. I will rejoin those. Page number: 642. Case name: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v DONNELL THOMAS, Also Known as RAYMOND RODRIGUEZ, Appellant. Short name: People v. Thomas. The citation in brackets “[882 NYS2d 99]” is the reporter cite. Formatting the citation: Note: NY courts often omit periods in cites (NY2d vs N.Y.2d). I will preserve the inner text exactly. Wait, “Boykin v Alabama (395 US 238 [1969])” - the cite is inside parentheses. Let‘s do it.