Matter of Martinez v Fish
2008 NY Slip Op 06298
Decided on July 15, 2008
Appellate Division, Second Department
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on July 15, 2008
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
ROBERT A. SPOLZINO, J.P.
DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO
RUTH C. BALKIN
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, JJ.

2007-08400
(Index No. 16757/06)

[*1]In the Matter of Jorge Martinez, appellant,

v

Katherine Fish, etc., respondent.





Jorge Martinez, Ossining, N.Y., appellant pro se.
Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York, N.Y.
(Michael S. Belohlavek and Marion R.
Buchbinder of counsel), for respondent.


DECISION & ORDER

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent dated June 3, 2006, which calculated the length of the petitioner's sentence of imprisonment, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cacace, J.), entered December 7, 2006, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A court has the inherent power to correct a sentence more than a year after it has been imposed "where the record demonstrates that the Judge merely misspoke in imposing sentence or it is clear from the record that a patent clerical error has been made in imposing sentence" (Matter of Kisloff v Covington, 73 NY2d 445, 450 [citations omitted]; see People v Wright, 56 NY2d 613, 614; People v Minaya, 54 NY2d 360, cert denied 455 US 1024; People ex rel. Hirschberg v Orange County Ct., 271 NY 151, 156; People v Rubendall, 4 AD3d 13, 17; People v Ruiz, 226 AD2d 747; People v Riggins, 164 AD2d 797). Here, the sentencing court properly exercised its inherent power to correct the alleged discrepancy between the stenographic minutes of the sentencing proceeding and the original order of commitment by entering an amended order of commitment (see Matter of El-Aziz v Goord, 27 AD3d 861, 862; People ex rel. Davidson v Kelly, 193 AD2d 1140, 1141).

The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.[*2]
SPOLZINO, J.P., ANGIOLILLO, BALKIN and LEVENTHAL, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
James Edward Pelzer
Clerk of the Court


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.