People v. Magliocco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Magliocco

144 A.D.3d 1545, 40 N.Y.S.3d 328

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

DecidedNovember 10, 2016

StatusPublished

This text of 144 A.D.3d 1545 (People v. Magliocco) 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. Magliocco, 144 A.D.3d 1545, 40 N.Y.S.3d 328 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

from a Appeal judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered July 3, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sexual act in the third degree.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convict[1546]*1546ing him, upon his Alford plea, of criminal sexual act in the third degree (Penal Law § 130.40 [2]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, we conclude that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal, and that valid waiver encompasses his challenge to the severity of the sentence (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; see generally People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]).

Present—Centra, J.P., Peradotto, DeJoseph, NeMoyer and Curran, JJ.

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

from a Appeal judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered July 3, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sexual act in the third degree.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convict[1546]*1546ing him, upon his Alford plea, of criminal sexual act in the third degree (Penal Law § 130.40 [2]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, we conclude that he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal, and that valid waiver encompasses his challenge to the severity of the sentence (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; see generally People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]).

Present—Centra, J.P., Peradotto, DeJoseph, NeMoyer and Curran, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

144 A.D.3d 1545, 40 N.Y.S.3d 328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-magliocco-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack