People v. Lasher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lasher

2017 NY Slip Op 4734, 151 A.D.3d 1765, 53 N.Y.S.3d 855

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

DecidedJune 9, 2017

Docket839 KA 16-01034

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 4734 (People v. Lasher) 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. Lasher, 2017 NY Slip Op 4734, 151 A.D.3d 1765, 53 N.Y.S.3d 855 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Russell P. Buscaglia, A.J.), rendered January 29, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a plea of guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal does not encompass his challenge to the severity of the sentence. Specifically, defendant contends that Supreme Court’s colloquy was insufficient to ensure that defendant understood all of the rights he was waiving. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the record establishes that defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived the right to appeal (see generally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). Defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal, which specifically included a waiver of the right to challenge the “severity of any sentence,” encompasses his contention that the sentence imposed is unduly harsh and severe (see id. at 255-256; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]; cf. People v Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 928 [2012]).

Present — Centra, J.P., Lindley, DeJoseph, NeMoyer and Troutman, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Russell P. Buscaglia, A.J.), rendered January 29, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a plea of guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal does not encompass his challenge to the severity of the sentence. Specifically, defendant contends that Supreme Court’s colloquy was insufficient to ensure that defendant understood all of the rights he was waiving. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the record establishes that defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived the right to appeal (see generally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]). Defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal, which specifically included a waiver of the right to challenge the “severity of any sentence,” encompasses his contention that the sentence imposed is unduly harsh and severe (see id. at 255-256; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]; cf. People v Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 928 [2012]).

Present — Centra, J.P., Lindley, DeJoseph, NeMoyer and Troutman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 4734, 151 A.D.3d 1765, 53 N.Y.S.3d 855, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lasher-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack