People v. Cannon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cannon

59 A.D.3d 962, 872 N.Y.S.2d 322

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 A.D.3d 962 (People v. Cannon) 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. Cannon, 59 A.D.3d 962, 872 N.Y.S.2d 322 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judg[963]*963ment of the Onondaga County Court (Anthony F. Aloi, J.), rendered May 20, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first 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 robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [4]). By failing to move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that his plea was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see People v VanDeViver, 56 AD3d 1118 [2008]). In any event, that contention is belied by the record. The further contention of defendant with respect to his purported waiver of the right to appeal is also without merit inasmuch as the record establishes that defendant did not waive his right to appeal. Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Scudder, EJ., Hurlbutt, Martoche, Green and Gorski, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judg[963]*963ment of the Onondaga County Court (Anthony F. Aloi, J.), rendered May 20, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first 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 robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [4]). By failing to move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that his plea was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see People v VanDeViver, 56 AD3d 1118 [2008]). In any event, that contention is belied by the record. The further contention of defendant with respect to his purported waiver of the right to appeal is also without merit inasmuch as the record establishes that defendant did not waive his right to appeal. Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Scudder, EJ., Hurlbutt, Martoche, Green and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.D.3d 962, 872 N.Y.S.2d 322, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cannon-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack