People v. Grillo

2024 NY Slip Op 05110
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 16, 2024
DocketInd. No. 229/19
StatusPublished

This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 05110 (People v. Grillo) 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. Grillo, 2024 NY Slip Op 05110 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

People v Grillo (2024 NY Slip Op 05110)
People v Grillo
2024 NY Slip Op 05110
Decided on October 16, 2024
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on October 16, 2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, J.P.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS
BARRY E. WARHIT
DONNA-MARIE E. GOLIA, JJ.

2021-06516
(Ind. No. 229/19)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Richard Grillo, appellant.


Steven A. Feldman, Manhasset, NY, for appellant.

Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Grazia DiVincenzo and Marion Tang of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Mark D. Cohen, J., at plea; Richard Ambro, J., at sentence), rendered August 3, 2021, convicting him of attempted burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record demonstrates that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248). The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contention that the County Court improvidently exercised its discretion in imposing an enhanced sentence, as well as his contentions that the enhanced sentence was excessive and that the sentence constituted cruel and unusual punishment (see People v Esson, 225 AD3d 786, 787; People v Todarello, 185 AD3d 970, 970-971; People v Catanzaro, 157 AD3d 961).

IANNACCI, J.P., CHAMBERS, WARHIT and GOLIA, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Lopez
844 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Todarello
2020 NY Slip Op 4190 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2024 NY Slip Op 05110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-grillo-nyappdiv-2024.