People v. Candelario

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Candelario

295 A.D.2d 997, 743 N.Y.S.2d 361, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6249

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

DecidedJune 14, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 295 A.D.2d 997 (People v. Candelario) 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. Candelario, 295 A.D.2d 997, 743 N.Y.S.2d 361, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6249 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of Orleans County Court (Punch, J.), entered February 9, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 205.25 [2]). The record establishes that defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary (see [998]*998People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280). In any event, we conclude that defendant’s contention on appeal lacks merit. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Burns, JJ.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of Orleans County Court (Punch, J.), entered February 9, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted promoting prison contraband in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 205.25 [2]). The record establishes that defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary (see [998]*998People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280). In any event, we conclude that defendant’s contention on appeal lacks merit. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Burns, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 A.D.2d 997, 743 N.Y.S.2d 361, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-candelario-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack