People v. Allred

270 A.D.2d 926, 706 N.Y.S.2d 656, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3417
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 29, 2000·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that he did not receive timely notice of his right to testify before the Grand Jury. He concedes, however, that he waived his right to appeal as part of his plea of guilty, and that waiver encompasses his contentions (see generally, People v Moissett, 76 NY2d 909, 910-911). In any event, by pleading guilty, defendant “removed this issue from the case and, lacking express statutory authorization, he cannot resuscitate it on appeal” (People v Taylor, 65 NY2d 1, 7; see, People v Holt, 210 AD2d 994, 995). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Cayuga County Court, Contiguglia, J. — Criminal Possession Controlled Substance, 5th Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Wisner, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

People v. Allred, 270 A.D.2d 926, 706 N.Y.S.2d 656, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3417 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

270 A.D.2d 926 (People v. Allred) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Lighthall
6 A.D.3d 1170 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
People v. Jones
284 A.D.2d 1010 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
People v. Mitchell
274 A.D.2d 957 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)