People v. Givens

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Givens

36 A.D.3d 454, 831 N.Y.S.2d 30

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

DecidedJanuary 9, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 36 A.D.3d 454 (People v. Givens) 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. Givens, 36 A.D.3d 454, 831 N.Y.S.2d 30 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Steven Barrett, J.), rendered September 28, 2005, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

At the first of two plea proceedings, defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal as part of his plea agreement (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255-256 [2006]), and, as defendant expressly acknowledged, the second proceeding incorporated by reference the entire prior allocution. Accordingly, defendant’s waiver forecloses his present claims that his sentence was excessive and that the court should have granted him youthful offender treatment. Were we to find that defendant did not make an enforceable waiver, we would reject both arguments on the merits (see People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 285 [1992]). Concur — Tom, J.R, Friedman, Nardelli, Catterson and Malone, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Steven Barrett, J.), rendered September 28, 2005, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.

At the first of two plea proceedings, defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal as part of his plea agreement (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255-256 [2006]), and, as defendant expressly acknowledged, the second proceeding incorporated by reference the entire prior allocution. Accordingly, defendant’s waiver forecloses his present claims that his sentence was excessive and that the court should have granted him youthful offender treatment. Were we to find that defendant did not make an enforceable waiver, we would reject both arguments on the merits (see People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 285 [1992]). Concur — Tom, J.R, Friedman, Nardelli, Catterson and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 A.D.3d 454, 831 N.Y.S.2d 30, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-givens-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack