People v. Corbett

2020 NY Slip Op 4485, 186 A.D.3d 620, 126 N.Y.S.3d 671
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedAugust 12, 2020
DocketInd. No. 821/17
StatusPublished

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 4485 (People v. Corbett) 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. Corbett, 2020 NY Slip Op 4485, 186 A.D.3d 620, 126 N.Y.S.3d 671 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

People v Corbett (2020 NY Slip Op 04485)
People v Corbett
2020 NY Slip Op 04485
Decided on August 12, 2020
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on August 12, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.
JEFFREY A. COHEN
BETSY BARROS
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

2018-05533
(Ind. No. 821/17)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Eliezar Corbett, appellant.


Janet E. Sabel, New York, NY (Kristina Schwarz of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Diane Eisner of counsel; Marielle Burnett on the brief), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (ShawnDya L. Simpson, J.), rendered November 8, 2017, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The record demonstrates that the defendant validly waived his right to appeal (see People v Sanders, 25 NY3d 337; People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737; People v Marine, 176 AD3d 869). The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contention that the period of postrelease supervision imposed was excessive (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255; People v Cohen, 178 AD3d 719).

The defendant's contentions regarding four final orders of protection issued against him at the time of sentencing are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Nieves, 2 NY3d 310, 315; People v David G., 176 AD3d 970; People v Rivera, 171 AD3d 1097, 1098; People v Carryl, 169 AD3d 818, 820), and we decline to review them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

BALKIN, J.P., COHEN, BARROS and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Nieves
811 N.E.2d 13 (New York Court of Appeals, 2004)
People v. Lopez
844 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
The People v. Rasaun Sanders
34 N.E.3d 344 (New York Court of Appeals, 2015)
People v. Ramos
853 N.E.2d 222 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 4485, 186 A.D.3d 620, 126 N.Y.S.3d 671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-corbett-nyappdiv-2020.