People v. Curtis

2018 NY Slip Op 4916
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 29, 2018
Docket842 KA 16-00729
StatusPublished

This text of 2018 NY Slip Op 4916 (People v. Curtis) 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. Curtis, 2018 NY Slip Op 4916 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

People v Curtis (2018 NY Slip Op 04916)
People v Curtis
2018 NY Slip Op 04916
Decided on June 29, 2018
Appellate Division, Fourth 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 June 29, 2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, NEMOYER, AND WINSLOW, JJ.

842 KA 16-00729

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

v

GARY CURTIS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.


FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (KRISTEN N. MCDERMOTT OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (JAMES P. MAXWELL OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.



Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Thomas J. Miller, J.), rendered March 1, 2016. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sexual act in the first degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sexual act in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.50 [4]). Contrary to defendant's contention, the record establishes that he validly waived his right to appeal (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256-257 [2006]; see also People v Pope, 129 AD3d 1389, 1391 [3d Dept 2015] [Devine, J., concurring]). Defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal forecloses his challenge to the severity of his sentence (see Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256). Finally, we note that both the uniform sentence and commitment sheet and the certificate of conviction incorrectly recite that the offense was committed on January 1, 2015, and thus both must be amended to reflect the correct date of March 3, 2015 (see generally People v Bradley, 52 AD3d 1261, 1262 [4th Dept 2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 734 [2008]).

Entered: June 29, 2018

Mark W. Bennett

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Lopez
844 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Pope
129 A.D.3d 1389 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
People v. Bradley
52 A.D.3d 1261 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 NY Slip Op 4916, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-curtis-nyappdiv-2018.