People v. Arellano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Arellano

281 A.D.2d 553, 721 N.Y.S.2d 811, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2589

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

DecidedMarch 19, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 281 A.D.2d 553 (People v. Arellano) 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. Arellano, 281 A.D.2d 553, 721 N.Y.S.2d 811, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2589 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ambrosio, J.), rendered September 24, 1999, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived, without limitation, the right to appeal his conviction and sentence (see, People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1; People v Miller, 278 AD2d 434; People v Espinal, 277 AD2d 464; People v Brathwaite, 263 AD2d 89). The defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal encompasses his claim that he was entitled to a more lenient sentence because of an alleged cooperation agreement which does not appear on the record of the plea allocution. Even if his claim were not encompassed by the waiver, under the facts of this case the Supreme Court properly decided not to recognize the alleged cooperation agreement, denied the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea, and sentenced the defendant in accordance with the plea placed on the record (see, People v Huertas, 85 NY2d 898; People v Curdgel, 83 NY2d 862; Matter of Benjamin S., 55 NY2d 116, 121; People v Watford, 239 AD2d 367; see also, United States v El-Gheur, 201 F3d 90). O’Brien, J. P., Friedmann, Goldstein and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ambrosio, J.), rendered September 24, 1999, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived, without limitation, the right to appeal his conviction and sentence (see, People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1; People v Miller, 278 AD2d 434; People v Espinal, 277 AD2d 464; People v Brathwaite, 263 AD2d 89). The defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal encompasses his claim that he was entitled to a more lenient sentence because of an alleged cooperation agreement which does not appear on the record of the plea allocution. Even if his claim were not encompassed by the waiver, under the facts of this case the Supreme Court properly decided not to recognize the alleged cooperation agreement, denied the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea, and sentenced the defendant in accordance with the plea placed on the record (see, People v Huertas, 85 NY2d 898; People v Curdgel, 83 NY2d 862; Matter of Benjamin S., 55 NY2d 116, 121; People v Watford, 239 AD2d 367; see also, United States v El-Gheur, 201 F3d 90). O’Brien, J. P., Friedmann, Goldstein and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D.2d 553, 721 N.Y.S.2d 811, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-arellano-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack