People v. Jaeger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jaeger

227 A.D.2d 501, 643 N.Y.S.2d 359, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5075

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

DecidedMay 13, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 227 A.D.2d 501 (People v. Jaeger) 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. Jaeger, 227 A.D.2d 501, 643 N.Y.S.2d 359, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5075 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered February 6, 1995, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The contentions raised on appeal by the defendant are not preserved for appellate review because the defendant failed to object at sentencing, move to withdraw his plea, or move to vacate the judgment of conviction (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d [502]*502662; People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636). In any event, we find that the court did not coerce the defendant into pleading guilty and that the defendant had sufficient time to consult with his attorneys concerning his plea. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered February 6, 1995, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The contentions raised on appeal by the defendant are not preserved for appellate review because the defendant failed to object at sentencing, move to withdraw his plea, or move to vacate the judgment of conviction (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d [502]*502662; People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636). In any event, we find that the court did not coerce the defendant into pleading guilty and that the defendant had sufficient time to consult with his attorneys concerning his plea. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 A.D.2d 501, 643 N.Y.S.2d 359, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5075, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jaeger-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack