People v. Banks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Banks

117 A.D.3d 1481, 984 N.Y.S.2d 909

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

DecidedMay 2, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 117 A.D.3d 1481 (People v. Banks) 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. Banks, 117 A.D.3d 1481, 984 N.Y.S.2d 909 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Christopher J. Burns, J.), rendered September 4, 2012. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of grand larceny in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her upon her plea of guilty of grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law § 155.35) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (§ 220.16 [12]). We agree with defendant that the waiver of the right to appeal does not encompass her challenge to the severity of the sentence inasmuch as “ ‘no mention was made on the record during the course of the allocution concerning the waiver of defendant’s right to appeal’ with respect to [her] conviction that [she] was also waiving [her] right to appeal any issue concerning the severity of the sentence” (People v Peterson, 111 AD3d 1412, 1412 [2013]; see People v Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 928 [2012]). We nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Present — Centra, J.P., Fahey, Peradotto, Lindley and Valentino, JJ.

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

— Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Christopher J. Burns, J.), rendered September 4, 2012. The judgment convicted defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of grand larceny in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting her upon her plea of guilty of grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law § 155.35) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (§ 220.16 [12]). We agree with defendant that the waiver of the right to appeal does not encompass her challenge to the severity of the sentence inasmuch as “ ‘no mention was made on the record during the course of the allocution concerning the waiver of defendant’s right to appeal’ with respect to [her] conviction that [she] was also waiving [her] right to appeal any issue concerning the severity of the sentence” (People v Peterson, 111 AD3d 1412, 1412 [2013]; see People v Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 928 [2012]). We nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Present — Centra, J.P., Fahey, Peradotto, Lindley and Valentino, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 A.D.3d 1481, 984 N.Y.S.2d 909, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-banks-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack