People v. Doyle

2024 NY Slip Op 00779
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 14, 2024
Docket2022-10090
StatusPublished

This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 00779 (People v. Doyle) 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. Doyle, 2024 NY Slip Op 00779 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

People v Doyle (2024 NY Slip Op 00779)
People v Doyle
2024 NY Slip Op 00779
Decided on February 14, 2024
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 February 14, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P.
JOSEPH J. MALTESE
HELEN VOUTSINAS
CARL J. LANDICINO, JJ.

2022-10090
2022-10100
(Ind. No. 292/19; S.C.I. No. 385/21)

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

v

Sean Doyle, appellant.


Meth Law Offices, P.C., Chester, NY (Michael D. Meth of counsel), for appellant.

David Hoovler, District Attorney, Goshen, NY (Edward D. Saslaw of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Orange County (Craig Stephen Brown, J.), both rendered November 16, 2021, convicting him of coercion in the first degree, criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation, and endangering the welfare of a child (three counts) under Indictment No. 292/19, and forgery in the second degree under Superior Court Information No. 385/21, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant's waivers of his right to appeal, the validity of which he does not challenge, preclude appellate review of his contentions that the sentences imposed were excessive (see People v Guzman, 127 AD3d 1108).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.

IANNACCI, J.P., MALTESE, VOUTSINAS and LANDICINO, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Acting Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Guzman
127 A.D.3d 1108 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2024 NY Slip Op 00779, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-doyle-nyappdiv-2024.