People v. Cullen

101 A.D.3d 1391, 955 N.Y.2d 535

This text of 101 A.D.3d 1391 (People v. Cullen) 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. Cullen, 101 A.D.3d 1391, 955 N.Y.2d 535 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

Spain, J.

We affirm. To the extent that defendant contends that Ms waiver of the right to appeal was invalid, we are unpersuaded. The plea allocution — which included an oral waiver — and the written waiver demonstrate that defendant knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his right to appeal the conviction and sentence (see People v Jerome, 98 AD3d 1188, 1189 [2012]; see also People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Ducheneaux, 97 AD3d 852, 853 [2012]). Consequently, we are precluded from considering his claim that the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive (see People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 736-737 [1998]; People v Lopez, 97 AD3d 853, 853-854 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 1027 [2012]; see also People v Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256).

Mercure, J.P., Malone Jr., Stein and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

People v. Hidalgo
698 N.E.2d 46 (New York Court of Appeals, 1998)
People v. Lopez
844 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Ducheneaux
97 A.D.3d 852 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Lopez
97 A.D.3d 853 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Jerome
98 A.D.3d 1188 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
101 A.D.3d 1391, 955 N.Y.2d 535, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cullen-nyappdiv-2012.