Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Wayne Francis, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2011-03-29
Citations: 82 A.D.3d 1263
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Wayne Francis, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 82
Pages: 1263–1263

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Wayne Francis, Appellant.
[919 NYS2d 394]

Opinion:
On appeal, the defendant contends that the County Court erred in imposing restitution without a hearing because, inter alia, there was insufficient, evidence in the record to allow the County Court to determine the amount he should pay. However, since the defendant failed to request a restitution hearing, and did not object to the amount of restitution he was required to pay, his present claims regarding the imposition of restitution are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Horne, 97 NY2d 404, 414 n 3 [2002]; People v Nelson, 77 AD3d 973 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 954 [2010]; People v Harris, 72 AD3d 1110, 1112 [2010]; People v Isaacs, 71 AD3d 1161 [2010]; People v Golgoski, 40 AD3d 1138 [2007]).
The defendant's challenge to the imposition of the mandatory surcharge and crime victim assistance fee also is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Ruz, 70 NY2d 942, 943 [1988]; People v Fauntleroy, 57 AD3d 1167, 1168 [2008]; People v Ziolkowski, 9 AD3d 915 [2004]; People v Acevedo, 243 AD2d 572, 573 [1997]). Rivera, J.P, Angiolillo, Eng and Sgroi, JJ., concur.