People v. Celestin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Celestin

263 A.D.2d 513, 692 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8098

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

DecidedJuly 19, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 263 A.D.2d 513 (People v. Celestin) 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. Celestin, 263 A.D.2d 513, 692 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8098 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), rendered January 30, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent, and served to effectively waive appellate review of the specific issues which he now seeks to raise (see, People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 283; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), rendered January 30, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent, and served to effectively waive appellate review of the specific issues which he now seeks to raise (see, People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 283; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D.2d 513, 692 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8098, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-celestin-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack