People v. Hidalgo

131 A.D.3d 483, 13 N.Y.S.3d 907
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 5, 2015·No. 2013-08278·Published

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by her motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J.), imposed August 5, 2013, upon her plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

The defendant’s waiver of her right to appeal was invalid (see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 265 [2011]; People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133 [2014]) and, thus, does not preclude review of her excessive sentence claim. However, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

Eng, P.J., Mastro, Sgroi, Miller and Barros, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Hidalgo, 131 A.D.3d 483, 13 N.Y.S.3d 907 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

131 A.D.3d 483 (People v. Hidalgo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Brown
122 A.D.3d 133 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Bradshaw
961 N.E.2d 645 (New York Court of Appeals, 2011)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)