People v. Eaton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Eaton

2017 NY Slip Op 5369, 151 A.D.3d 1950, 54 N.Y.S.3d 903

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

DecidedJune 30, 2017

Docket903 KA 16-00866

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 5369 (People v. Eaton) 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. Eaton, 2017 NY Slip Op 5369, 151 A.D.3d 1950, 54 N.Y.S.3d 903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Oneida County Court (Barry M. Donalty, J.), rendered April 28, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of gang assault 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 gang assault in the first *1951 degree (Penal Law § 120.07). We reject defendant’s contention that he did not validly waive his right to appeal any issue concerning the severity of the sentence. Defendant’s oral waiver of the right to appeal was accompanied by a written waiver stating that defendant was waiving his right to appeal “issues relating to [his] sentence and conviction” (see People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738 [2006]; People v McArthur, 149 AD3d 1568, 1568-1569 [2017]), and County Court obtained defendant’s assurances at the plea proceeding that he had read and understood the written waiver {see People v Lewis, 143 AD3d 1183, 1185 [2016]). The court’s statements at the plea colloquy and the terms of the written waiver also “adequately apprised defendant that the right to appeal is separate and distinct from those rights automatically forfeited upon a plea of guilty” (People v Sampson, 149 AD3d 1486, 1487 [2017] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Thus, defendant may not challenge the severity of the sentence on this appeal.

Present — Whalen, P.J., Carni, Lindley, Curran and Scudder, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Oneida County Court (Barry M. Donalty, J.), rendered April 28, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of gang assault 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 gang assault in the first *1951 degree (Penal Law § 120.07). We reject defendant’s contention that he did not validly waive his right to appeal any issue concerning the severity of the sentence. Defendant’s oral waiver of the right to appeal was accompanied by a written waiver stating that defendant was waiving his right to appeal “issues relating to [his] sentence and conviction” (see People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738 [2006]; People v McArthur, 149 AD3d 1568, 1568-1569 [2017]), and County Court obtained defendant’s assurances at the plea proceeding that he had read and understood the written waiver {see People v Lewis, 143 AD3d 1183, 1185 [2016]). The court’s statements at the plea colloquy and the terms of the written waiver also “adequately apprised defendant that the right to appeal is separate and distinct from those rights automatically forfeited upon a plea of guilty” (People v Sampson, 149 AD3d 1486, 1487 [2017] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Thus, defendant may not challenge the severity of the sentence on this appeal.

Present — Whalen, P.J., Carni, Lindley, Curran and Scudder, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 5369, 151 A.D.3d 1950, 54 N.Y.S.3d 903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-eaton-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack