People v. Goins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Goins

246 A.D.2d 667, 666 N.Y.S.2d 954, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 574

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 246 A.D.2d 667 (People v. Goins) 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. Goins, 246 A.D.2d 667, 666 N.Y.S.2d 954, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 574 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), both rendered August 30, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree under Indictment No. 4732/94, upon a jury verdict, and robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 794/95, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court’s Sandoval ruling was not improper and the Assistant District Attorney’s cross-examination did not constitute reversible error. The defendant’s remaining contentions under Indictment No. 4732/94 are without merit or do not require reversal of the judgment.

The record of the proceedings relating to the defendant’s plea of guilty under Indictment No. 794/95 demonstrates that he effectively waived his right to appeal from the judgment rendered under that indictment (see, People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). Ritter, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), both rendered August 30, 1995, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and robbery in the second degree under Indictment No. 4732/94, upon a jury verdict, and robbery in the first degree under Indictment No. 794/95, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court’s Sandoval ruling was not improper and the Assistant District Attorney’s cross-examination did not constitute reversible error. The defendant’s remaining contentions under Indictment No. 4732/94 are without merit or do not require reversal of the judgment.

The record of the proceedings relating to the defendant’s plea of guilty under Indictment No. 794/95 demonstrates that he effectively waived his right to appeal from the judgment rendered under that indictment (see, People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). Ritter, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D.2d 667, 666 N.Y.S.2d 954, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 574, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-goins-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack