People v. Kirton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Kirton

272 A.D.2d 89, 708 N.Y.S.2d 288, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4939

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

DecidedMay 4, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 89 (People v. Kirton) 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. Kirton, 272 A.D.2d 89, 708 N.Y.S.2d 288, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4939 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Denis Boyle, J., at suppression hearing; Gerald Sheindlin, J., at plea and sentence), rendered January 5, 1998, convicting defendant of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

Since the circumstances of defendant’s plea cast no doubt on defendant’s ability to understand the proceedings, information contained in defendant’s presentence report concerning a past history of psychiatric treatment did not obligate the court to conduct a sua sponte inquiry into his competency (see, People v Tortorici, 92 NY2d 757, 765; People v Gelikkaya, 84 NY2d 456, 459).

Appellate review of defendant’s remaining claims is foreclosed by defendant’s knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver of his right to appeal. Concur — Rubin, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Denis Boyle, J., at suppression hearing; Gerald Sheindlin, J., at plea and sentence), rendered January 5, 1998, convicting defendant of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

Since the circumstances of defendant’s plea cast no doubt on defendant’s ability to understand the proceedings, information contained in defendant’s presentence report concerning a past history of psychiatric treatment did not obligate the court to conduct a sua sponte inquiry into his competency (see, People v Tortorici, 92 NY2d 757, 765; People v Gelikkaya, 84 NY2d 456, 459).

Appellate review of defendant’s remaining claims is foreclosed by defendant’s knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver of his right to appeal. Concur — Rubin, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 89, 708 N.Y.S.2d 288, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4939, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-kirton-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack