People v. Graczyk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Graczyk

210 A.D.2d 996, 621 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13552

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

DecidedDecember 23, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 210 A.D.2d 996 (People v. Graczyk) 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. Graczyk, 210 A.D.2d 996, 621 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13552 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unani[997]*997mously affirmed. Memorandum: The contention of defendant that his sentence is unduly harsh or excessive does not survive the voluntary, knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to appeal (see, People v Allen, 82 NY2d 761; People v Saunders, 190 AD2d 1092, lv denied 81 NY2d 1019).

The further contention of defendant that his sentence should be modified because he was under the impression that he would receive a maximum term of 25 to 50 years imprisonment is without merit. The record establishes that the court repeatedly refused to commit to a promised sentence. Moreover, defendant’s sentence will be reduced by operation of law to the statutory maximum (see, Penal Law § 70.30 [1] [c] [iii]). The statutory calculation will be made by the Department of Correctional Services (see, People v Beaufort-Cutner, 190 AD2d 992, 994, lv denied 81 NY2d 1011; People v Bachman, 158 AD2d 930, lv denied 75 NY2d 963).

Defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rossetti, J.— Sodomy, 1st Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Judgment unani[997]*997mously affirmed. Memorandum: The contention of defendant that his sentence is unduly harsh or excessive does not survive the voluntary, knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to appeal (see, People v Allen, 82 NY2d 761; People v Saunders, 190 AD2d 1092, lv denied 81 NY2d 1019).

The further contention of defendant that his sentence should be modified because he was under the impression that he would receive a maximum term of 25 to 50 years imprisonment is without merit. The record establishes that the court repeatedly refused to commit to a promised sentence. Moreover, defendant’s sentence will be reduced by operation of law to the statutory maximum (see, Penal Law § 70.30 [1] [c] [iii]). The statutory calculation will be made by the Department of Correctional Services (see, People v Beaufort-Cutner, 190 AD2d 992, 994, lv denied 81 NY2d 1011; People v Bachman, 158 AD2d 930, lv denied 75 NY2d 963).

Defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rossetti, J.— Sodomy, 1st Degree.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 A.D.2d 996, 621 N.Y.S.2d 1005, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13552, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-graczyk-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack