People v. Jeter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jeter

207 A.D.2d 973, 617 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10159

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 207 A.D.2d 973 (People v. Jeter) 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. Jeter, 207 A.D.2d 973, 617 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10159 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him of violating the terms of his probation and sentencing him to a term of incarceration of 1 Vis to 4 years. Defendant contends that the court sentenced him to a [974]*974term longer than that promised at the time of his initial plea without allowing him to withdraw that plea. Defendant additionally contends that the sentence is harsh or excessive.

Defendant’s first contention is not properly before us. Defendant may not be relieved of his initial guilty plea because he failed to move to withdraw it (see, CPL 220.60 [3]) or to vacate the judgment of conviction (see, CPL 440.10; People v Mayers, 74 NY2d 931; cf., People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665).

Finally, the sentence is not harsh or excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, Drury, J.—Violation of Probation.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him of violating the terms of his probation and sentencing him to a term of incarceration of 1 Vis to 4 years. Defendant contends that the court sentenced him to a [974]*974term longer than that promised at the time of his initial plea without allowing him to withdraw that plea. Defendant additionally contends that the sentence is harsh or excessive.

Defendant’s first contention is not properly before us. Defendant may not be relieved of his initial guilty plea because he failed to move to withdraw it (see, CPL 220.60 [3]) or to vacate the judgment of conviction (see, CPL 440.10; People v Mayers, 74 NY2d 931; cf., People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665).

Finally, the sentence is not harsh or excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, Drury, J.—Violation of Probation.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 973, 617 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jeter-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack