People v. Graham

110 A.D.2d 715, 487 N.Y.S.2d 611, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48613
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 8, 1985·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

We note that the issues raised by defendant concerning her plea of guilty were not presented to the court of first instance in a motion to withdraw the plea or by way of a motion to vacate the judgment. Accordingly, those issues have not been preserved for review (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636; People v Willie, 101 AD2d 819). However, we have considered the issues and find no basis for the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

Regarding defendant’s sentence, which she claims is excessive, she pleaded guilty with the understanding that she would receive the sentence which was thereafter actually imposed. On this record, defendant has no basis to now complain that her sentence was excessive. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Thompson and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Graham, 110 A.D.2d 715, 487 N.Y.S.2d 611, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48613 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

110 A.D.2d 715 (People v. Graham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Brandow
139 A.D.2d 819 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)