People v. Cherry

278 A.D.2d 865, 718 N.Y.S.2d 691, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13640
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Cherry. Read the opinion of the Court — 302 A.D.2d 472

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant’s contention that Supreme Court abdicated its sentencing discretion to the victims. Contrary to the contention of defendant, the record establishes that his waiver of the right to appeal was knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see, People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833). That waiver encompasses defendant’s challenge to the severity of the sentence (see, People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737). In any event, the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Forma, J. — Attempted Sexual Abuse, 2nd Degree.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Green, Hayes, Wisner and Lawton, JJ.

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

People v. Cherry, 278 A.D.2d 865, 718 N.Y.S.2d 691, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13640 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

278 A.D.2d 865 (People v. Cherry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Hidalgo
698 N.E.2d 46 (New York Court of Appeals, 1998)
People v. Kemp
724 N.E.2d 754 (New York Court of Appeals, 1999)