People v. Keene

2018 NY Slip Op 2651
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 18, 2018
Docket2016-02483
StatusPublished

This text of 2018 NY Slip Op 2651 (People v. Keene) 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. Keene, 2018 NY Slip Op 2651 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

People v Keene (2018 NY Slip Op 02651)
People v Keene
2018 NY Slip Op 02651
Decided on April 18, 2018
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 April 18, 2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
SHERI S. ROMAN
SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

2016-02483
2016-02484

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

v

Wesley M. Keene, appellant. (Ind. Nos. 2455-14, 971-15)


Laurette D. Mulry, Riverhead, NY (Alfred J. Cicale of counsel), for appellant.

Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Edward A. Bannan of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the County Court, Suffolk County (John B. Collins, J.), both rendered August 4, 2015, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree under Indictment No. 2455-14, and robbery in the third degree under Indictment No. 971-15, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant's purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid (see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 264; People v Weber, 153 AD3d 946; People v Flores, 139 AD3d 753; People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133) and, thus, does not preclude review of his claims that the sentences imposed should be reduced. However, the sentences imposed were not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80), and we decline to reduce them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

RIVERA, J.P., ROMAN, HINDS-RADIX and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Brown
122 A.D.3d 133 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Flores
139 A.D.3d 753 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
People v. Weber
2017 NY Slip Op 6387 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 NY Slip Op 2651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-keene-nyappdiv-2018.