People v. Amaker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Amaker

299 A.D.2d 238, 749 N.Y.S.2d 419, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11225

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 19, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 299 A.D.2d 238 (People v. Amaker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Amaker, 299 A.D.2d 238, 749 N.Y.S.2d 419, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11225 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Ward, J.), rendered July 25, 2001, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of four months of intermittent imprisonment to be served on weekends and five years probation, unanimously affirmed. The matter is remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s request for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether he violated his plea agreement by failing to successfully complete a drug treatment program, since based on the information provided by the program, the court’s personal review of defendant’s file and, in particular, defendant’s concessions and explanations as to his behavior, the court had sufficient information to make an informed decision (see People v Outley, 80 NY2d 702).

Defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal forecloses review of his excessive sentence claim, which is without merit in any event. Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Ward, J.), rendered July 25, 2001, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of four months of intermittent imprisonment to be served on weekends and five years probation, unanimously affirmed. The matter is remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s request for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether he violated his plea agreement by failing to successfully complete a drug treatment program, since based on the information provided by the program, the court’s personal review of defendant’s file and, in particular, defendant’s concessions and explanations as to his behavior, the court had sufficient information to make an informed decision (see People v Outley, 80 NY2d 702).

Defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal forecloses review of his excessive sentence claim, which is without merit in any event. Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

299 A.D.2d 238, 749 N.Y.S.2d 419, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-amaker-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack