People v. Lawrence

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lawrence

224 A.D.2d 548, 638 N.Y.S.2d 341, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1117

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

DecidedFebruary 13, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 224 A.D.2d 548 (People v. Lawrence) 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. Lawrence, 224 A.D.2d 548, 638 N.Y.S.2d 341, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1117 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Meyerson, J.), rendered November 22, 1993, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence; and (2) an amended judgment of the same court (Rienzi, J.), rendered November 23, 1993, revoking a sentence of probation, previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree.

Ordered that the judgment and the amended judgment are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention that he was deprived of his right to be present at side-bar conferences during voir dire (see, People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247), the record demonstrated that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently executed a waiver after discussing it with his counsel (see, People v Epps, 37 NY2d 343, cert denied 423 US 999; People v Underwood, 201 AD2d 597).

[549]*549The defendant’s remaining contentions including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, without merit. Ritter, J. P., Thompson, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Meyerson, J.), rendered November 22, 1993, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence; and (2) an amended judgment of the same court (Rienzi, J.), rendered November 23, 1993, revoking a sentence of probation, previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree.

Ordered that the judgment and the amended judgment are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention that he was deprived of his right to be present at side-bar conferences during voir dire (see, People v Antommarchi, 80 NY2d 247), the record demonstrated that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently executed a waiver after discussing it with his counsel (see, People v Epps, 37 NY2d 343, cert denied 423 US 999; People v Underwood, 201 AD2d 597).

[549]*549The defendant’s remaining contentions including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, without merit. Ritter, J. P., Thompson, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D.2d 548, 638 N.Y.S.2d 341, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lawrence-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack