People v. Barker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Barker

266 A.D.2d 846, 698 N.Y.S.2d 805, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11828

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 266 A.D.2d 846 (People v. Barker) 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. Barker, 266 A.D.2d 846, 698 N.Y.S.2d 805, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11828 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a guilty plea of robbery in the third degree (Penal Law § 160.05). The record establishes that defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was voluntary, knowing and intelligent (see, People v DeJesus, 248 AD2d 1023, lv denied 92 NY2d 879; People v Zimmerman, 219 AD2d 848, lv denied 88 NY2d 856). “Because Supreme Court did not advise defendant of the potential periods of incarceration, the waiver by defendant of the right to appeal does not encompass his challenge to the severity of the sentence” (People v Wynn, 262 AD2d 1052; see, People v Shea, 254 AD2d 512). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Tills, J. — Robbery, 3rd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Hayes, Hurlbutt and Balio, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a guilty plea of robbery in the third degree (Penal Law § 160.05). The record establishes that defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was voluntary, knowing and intelligent (see, People v DeJesus, 248 AD2d 1023, lv denied 92 NY2d 879; People v Zimmerman, 219 AD2d 848, lv denied 88 NY2d 856). “Because Supreme Court did not advise defendant of the potential periods of incarceration, the waiver by defendant of the right to appeal does not encompass his challenge to the severity of the sentence” (People v Wynn, 262 AD2d 1052; see, People v Shea, 254 AD2d 512). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Tills, J. — Robbery, 3rd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Hayes, Hurlbutt and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 846, 698 N.Y.S.2d 805, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-barker-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack