People v. Baer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Baer

68 A.D.3d 1011, 889 N.Y.2d 865

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 15, 2009·Published

Opinion

The defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11 [1989]), and it forecloses appellate review of the defendant’s claim that the sentence imposed was excessive (see People v Cenname, 66 AD3d 795 [2009]; People v Hairston, 53 AD3d 669 [2008]). We note that the defendant was sentenced as a second felony drug offender, a status he does not challenge, and that the court merely misspoke at sentencing when it stated that the defendant was a second violent felony offender. Fisher, J.E, Santucci, Dickerson, Chambers and Lott, JJ., concur.

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

The defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11 [1989]), and it forecloses appellate review of the defendant’s claim that the sentence imposed was excessive (see People v Cenname, 66 AD3d 795 [2009]; People v Hairston, 53 AD3d 669 [2008]). We note that the defendant was sentenced as a second felony drug offender, a status he does not challenge, and that the court merely misspoke at sentencing when it stated that the defendant was a second violent felony offender. Fisher, J.E, Santucci, Dickerson, Chambers and Lott, JJ., concur.

People v. Baer, 68 A.D.3d 1011, 889 N.Y.2d 865 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

68 A.D.3d 1011 (People v. Baer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related