Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jose Marcano, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1993-12-14
Citations: 199 A.D.2d 86
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Marcano, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 199
Pages: 86–87

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Marcano, Appellant.
[605 NYS2d 51]

Opinion:
Judgments, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Carey, J.), rendered September 24, 1991, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of burglary in the second degree and arson in the third degree, and sentencing him to two concurrent terms of 2 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's claim that the sentencing court did not order a presentence investigation and written report thereon before sentencing him is without merit, the presentence report in the court's file indicating on its face that it was completed the day before sentencing and date-stamped and received by the sentencing court on the date of sentencing. That there are no references to the report in the sentencing minutes is irrelevant. Defendant may not presume by the record's silence that the court did not review the report or that defense counsel was not afforded an opportunity to argue from it. Judicial proceedings enjoy a presumption of regularity that "may be overcome only by affirmative proof sufficient to rebut its effectiveness" (People v Lopez, 97 AD2d 5, 7). Thus, absent affirmative proof to the contrary, it is to be presumed that the court regularly considered the report and made it available to counsel. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Ross and Asch, JJ.