New York County Felony Predicate Offences Convictions Offender Constitutionality Lawyers Attorney

The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Sat Graham Defendant

Supreme Court of New York, New York County

November 13, 1981

Facts:

The defendant, Who, after a jury trial in September, 1981, WAS Convicted of criminal possession of a weapon in the Third Degree, a violent felony offense, HAD Previously Been Convicted of Attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the Third Degree in 1975 and Attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the Third Degree in 1978. Thesis are now crimes as violent felony offenses Classified (Penal Law § 70.02, subd 1, by [d]) although They Were Classified as felonies only at the Time of defendant's prior convictions. Defendant HEREIN Further contender That now he cannot Be persistent violent felony was adjudged Because history délinquant 1975 conviction for Attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the Third Degree WAS constitutionally infirm. The defendant failed to raise HAD That very end in 1978 When He Was Sentenced as a predicate felony délinquant. At a Hearing to determined whether defendant Should Have Been Sentenced as a persistent violent felony Offender "pursuant to" NY Crim. Proc. Law § 400.20, defendant contended That history Two Prior felony convictions, subsequently reclassified as violent felonies, "should not Have Been Used as predicate offenses. The defendant aussi Challenged constitutionality of One Of The Prior convictions.

Issues:

Whether a defendant Prior felony convictions With Two Be Found To Be a persistent violent felony history WHERE délinquant Two previous convictions Occurred Prior to September 1, 1978, The effective date of the violent felony Offender Law?

Whether a defendant has a persistent violent felony Offender Hearing "The contest constitutionality of a 1975 felony conviction he failed to raise WHERE That conclusion in 1978 When He Was adjudged to Be a predicate felony Offender?

Discussion:

This short Held thats the defendant's felony convictions Two Prior, subsequently reclassified as violent felonies, May serve as a predicate history Being Sentenced to persist as a violent felony délinquant. Consequently, after Conducting a Hearing in Accordance With CPL 400.16, The Short Find the defendant to Be a persistent violent felony délinquant, Subject To The mandatory sentencing provisions prescribed in Section 70.08 Of The Penal Law for a class D violent felony offense persist.

This short Held That Further, defendant has Who Fail to challenge constitutionality of a The previous conviction at a Prior Hearing predicate felony (see CPL 400.20) each April IS precluded from Challenging the constitutionality of Such previous conviction "at any Subsequent Hearing to determined whether he Should Be Sentenced as a persistent violent felony délinquant; Since The sentencing statute for persistent violent felony Offenders (Penal Law § 70.08) Omits "any provision for The Sentencing of a class E violent felony délinquant persist, remedial legislation to rectify IS Needed The Situation. Accordingly, the defendants precluded from now HEREIN IS Contesting the constitutionality of His 1975 conviction by Virtue of His failure to challenge it at a predicate felony Hearing in 1978.

Conclusion:

This short Held thats the defendant IS Sentenced as a persistent violent felony Offender "pursuant to" NY Crim. Proc. Law § 400.20.

Disclaimer:

Thesis summaries are Provided By The SRIS Law Group. Theys Represent The Firm's unofficial Views of the Justices' opinions. The original opinion Should Be Their consulted for authoritative content.