People v. Ciluffo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ciluffo

247 A.D.2d 402, 667 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 797

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

DecidedFebruary 2, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 247 A.D.2d 402 (People v. Ciluffo) 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. Ciluffo, 247 A.D.2d 402, 667 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 797 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Savarese, J., at trial; Goldstein, J., at sentencing), rendered August 12, 1991, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal the judgment of conviction in exchange for a lenient sentence. Therefore, the defendant cannot challenge his judgment of conviction upon the grounds raised in his brief (see, People v Holman, 89 NY2d 876; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1; People v Clark, 223 AD2d 722; People v Elliott, 186 AD2d 754).

Ritter, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Luciano, 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 (Savarese, J., at trial; Goldstein, J., at sentencing), rendered August 12, 1991, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal the judgment of conviction in exchange for a lenient sentence. Therefore, the defendant cannot challenge his judgment of conviction upon the grounds raised in his brief (see, People v Holman, 89 NY2d 876; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1; People v Clark, 223 AD2d 722; People v Elliott, 186 AD2d 754).

Ritter, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D.2d 402, 667 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 797, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ciluffo-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack