People v. Buckman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Buckman

55 A.D.3d 1361, 864 N.Y.S.2d 358

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

DecidedOctober 3, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 55 A.D.3d 1361 (People v. Buckman) 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. Buckman, 55 A.D.3d 1361, 864 N.Y.S.2d 358 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Livingston County Court (Joan S. Kohout, J.), rendered October 20, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of 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 him upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.16 [1]). By pleading guilty, defendant forfeited his contention concerning the People’s alleged failure to comply with the notice requirements of CPL 710.30 (see People v Taylor, 65 NY2d 1, 6-7 [1985]; People v La Bar, 16 AD3d 1084 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 764 [2005]). We have considered defendant’s remaining contention and conclude that it is without merit. Present—Scudder, P.J., Hurlbutt, Martoche, Smith and Lunn, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Livingston County Court (Joan S. Kohout, J.), rendered October 20, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of 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 him upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.16 [1]). By pleading guilty, defendant forfeited his contention concerning the People’s alleged failure to comply with the notice requirements of CPL 710.30 (see People v Taylor, 65 NY2d 1, 6-7 [1985]; People v La Bar, 16 AD3d 1084 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 764 [2005]). We have considered defendant’s remaining contention and conclude that it is without merit. Present—Scudder, P.J., Hurlbutt, Martoche, Smith and Lunn, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 A.D.3d 1361, 864 N.Y.S.2d 358, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-buckman-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack