People v Villanueva
2009 NY Slip Op 06599 [65 AD3d 939]
September 22, 2009
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, November 4, 2009


The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
Armando Villanueva, Also Known as Armondo Villanueva,Appellant.

[*1]Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Mark W. Zeno of counsel),for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Yuval Simchi-Levi of counsel), forrespondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Patricia M. Nunez, J.), rendered March 28,2008, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlledsubstance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of 1 to 3 years, unanimouslyaffirmed.

The court properly granted defendant's motion for specific performance of the pleaagreement only to the extent of sentencing defendant in accordance with the fair and reasonablerecommendation of leniency made by the People, and properly concluded that defendant hadforfeited the even more favorable disposition he might have earned had he complied with all theterms of the agreement. Defendant did not preserve his claim that he was entitled to a hearingconcerning the reasons for his failure to appear voluntarily at sentencing (see People v Anonymous, 59 AD3d215 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d 850 [2009]), and we decline to review it in theinterest of justice. As an alternative holding, we also reject it on the merits. The requirements ofdue process were satisfied when the sentencing court "conduct[ed] an inquiry sufficient toconclude that a violation of the plea agreement occurred" (People v Valencia, 3 NY3d 714, 715 [2004]) and provideddefendant with a reasonable opportunity to present his explanations for the violation. Defendantfailed to appear for sentencing, never communicated with the court or his attorney about hisalleged inability to come to court, and was returned involuntarily 10 years later. The recordbefore the court also supported a finding that defendant violated a second condition of the pleaagreement by committing a crime prior to sentencing, [*2]notwithstanding that he subsequently pleaded guilty to a violationin satisfaction of the misdemeanor charges (see People v Delgado, 45 AD3d 496 [2007]).Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Andrias, Catterson, Acosta and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.


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.