People v. Huffman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Huffman

140 A.D.3d 1780, 32 N.Y.S.3d 546

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

DecidedJune 17, 2016

StatusPublished

This text of 140 A.D.3d 1780 (People v. Huffman) 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. Huffman, 140 A.D.3d 1780, 32 N.Y.S.3d 546 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Kenneth F. Case, J.), rendered August 4, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, the record establishes that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his right to appeal (see generally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). The valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his challenge to the severity of the sentence (see id. at 255; People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]).

Present — Whalen, P.J., Carni, NeMoyer, Troutman and Scudder, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Kenneth F. Case, J.), rendered August 4, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, the record establishes that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his right to appeal (see generally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). The valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his challenge to the severity of the sentence (see id. at 255; People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]).

Present — Whalen, P.J., Carni, NeMoyer, Troutman and Scudder, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 A.D.3d 1780, 32 N.Y.S.3d 546, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-huffman-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack