People v Mingo
2011 NY Slip Op 05528 [85 AD3d 1061]
June 21, 2011
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, August 10, 2011


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

[*1]Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Harold V. Ferguson, Jr., of counsel), for appellant, andappellant pro se.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J.Caferri, and Anastasia Spanakos of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lewis, J.),imposed September 26, 2008, upon his convictions of burglary in the first degree, robbery in thefirst degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict.

Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

The defendant waived his claim that his adjudication as a second felony offender wasimproper on the ground that his prior conviction was unconstitutionally obtained because thesentence to which he agreed was illegal, as he did not raise that issue at the resentencingproceeding (see CPL 400.21 [7] [b]; cf. People v Ashley, 71 AD3d 1286, 1287 [2010], affd 16NY3d 725 [2011]). The defendant's claim that the prior conviction was unconstitutionallyobtained because the plea of guilty to that crime was coerced is without merit. Even if thedefendant's testimony at the predicate felony offender hearing was credited, it would not establishthat the defendant's plea of guilty was not valid (see People v Sanchez-Martinez, 35 AD3d 632, 633 [2006];People v Outer, 197 AD2d 543, 544 [1993]).

The defendant's claim that the Supreme Court had the discretion to resentence him on thecounts that were not defective is without merit (see CPL 440.20). The defendant's claimthat the court did not have jurisdiction to resentence him at all is likewise without merit (cf. People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621[2011]). The defendant's remaining contention raised in his pro se supplemental brief is notproperly before this Court. Angiolillo, J.P., Balkin, Dickerson and Cohen, JJ., concur.


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.