People v. Luddington

5 A.D.3d 1042, 773 N.Y.S.2d 698, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3155
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 19, 2004
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 5 A.D.3d 1042 (People v. Luddington) 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. Luddington, 5 A.D.3d 1042, 773 N.Y.S.2d 698, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3155 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

Appeal from a resentence of the Onondaga County Court (Joseph E. Fahey, J.), rendered December 18, 2002. Defendant was resentenced upon his conviction of attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the resentence so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a resentence upon his conviction following his plea of guilty to attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 265.02 [1]). Defendant agreed to plead guilty in exchange for a promised sentence of a three-year determinate term of incarceration and a three-year period of postrelease supervision, and he was originally sentenced accordingly. County Court later resentenced defendant, however, to an indeterminate term of incarceration of 2 to 4 years and 5 years of postrelease supervision because the original sentence was illegal. The contentions of defendant that the plea was not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered and that he was denied effective assistance of counsel during plea negotiations are not reviewable by this Court on appeal from the resentence (see CPL 450.30 [3]; see generally People v Matthews, 306 AD2d 863, 864 [2003]; People v Ferrin, 197 AD2d 882, 882-883 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 849 [1993]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he did not receive the benefit of his plea bargain as a [1043]*1043result of the resentence (see People v Headley, 219 AD2d 857 [1995], lv denied 88 NY2d 848 [1996]). We decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]). Present—Green, J.P., Pine, Scudder, Gorski and Hayes, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Shorter
2025 NY Slip Op 01478 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Robinson
2018 NY Slip Op 2490 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
BRADFORD, JR., DANIEL, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016
People v. Bradford
138 A.D.3d 1436 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
CARLISLE, STEVEN T., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
People v. Carlisle
120 A.D.3d 1607 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Fields
79 A.D.3d 1147 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Lett
42 A.D.3d 970 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Ferrufino
33 A.D.3d 623 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. Delgado
29 A.D.3d 1017 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. DeSpirito
27 A.D.3d 479 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. Smith
21 A.D.3d 1360 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 A.D.3d 1042, 773 N.Y.S.2d 698, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3155, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-luddington-nyappdiv-2004.