People v Smith
2010 NY Slip Op 00202 [69 AD3d 450]
January 12, 2010
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, March 10, 2010


The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
SeanSmith, Appellant.

[*1]Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Bruce D. Austern ofcounsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Martin J. Foncello of counsel), forrespondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie G. Wittner, J.), rendered January 6,2009, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in thesecond and third degrees and unlicensed driving, and sentencing him, as a second felonyoffender, to an aggregate term of five years, unanimously affirmed.

Although defendant has appealed from his judgment of conviction, the only issue he raisesrelates to the legality of the sentencing court's direction that he register with the PoliceDepartment pursuant to the Gun Offender Registration Act (GORA) (Administrative Code ofCity of NY § 10-601 et seq.) and comply with the other requirements of GORAupon his release from prison. However, the registration and other requirements of GORA are notpart of the sentence, or otherwise part of the judgment. Instead, they are analogous to therequirements of the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA), and a SORA determination (forwhich the Legislature has provided a right to a separate civil appeal) may not be reviewed on anappeal from a criminal judgment (see People v Kearns, 95 NY2d 816, 817 [2000];People v Stevens, 91 NY2d 270, 277 [1998]). Moreover, here the court did not make anykind of certification or determination regarding GORA, or make GORA compliance a conditionof a nonincarceratory sentence under Penal Law article 65; its only involvement was to informdefendant of his legal obligations and to obtain his signature on a registration form.

Since the appeal is properly before us as an appeal from a judgment, we do not dismiss theappeal, but affirm on the ground that no reviewable issue has been raised (see People v [*2]Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 285 [1992]). In any event, defendant'schallenge to GORA is both unpreserved and without merit. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Catterson,Moskowitz, DeGrasse 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.