People v. London

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. London

208 A.D.2d 768, 618 N.Y.S.2d 542

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

DecidedOctober 17, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 208 A.D.2d 768 (People v. London) 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. London, 208 A.D.2d 768, 618 N.Y.S.2d 542 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), rendered September 8, 1992, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s plea allocution clearly demonstrates a voluntary, knowing, and intelligent waiver of his right to appeal from any and all rulings made by the trial court in connection with his case, including the negotiated concurrent sentences which the court ultimately imposed (see, People v Allen, 82 NY2d 761; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273; People v Moissett, 76 NY2d 909; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1; People v Roache, 166 AD2d 618). Miller, J. P., Joy, Atman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), rendered September 8, 1992, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s plea allocution clearly demonstrates a voluntary, knowing, and intelligent waiver of his right to appeal from any and all rulings made by the trial court in connection with his case, including the negotiated concurrent sentences which the court ultimately imposed (see, People v Allen, 82 NY2d 761; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273; People v Moissett, 76 NY2d 909; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1; People v Roache, 166 AD2d 618). Miller, J. P., Joy, Atman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 A.D.2d 768, 618 N.Y.S.2d 542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-london-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack