People v. Martinez-Diaz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Martinez-Diaz

30 A.D.3d 1104, 815 N.Y.S.2d 870

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

DecidedJune 9, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 30 A.D.3d 1104 (People v. Martinez-Diaz) 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. Martinez-Diaz, 30 A.D.3d 1104, 815 N.Y.S.2d 870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Ronald H. Tills, A.J.), rendered October 20, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 220.06 [5]), defendant contends that he did not validly waive his right to appeal. We reject that contention (see generally People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280 [1992]). Contrary to the further contention of defendant, his general waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his present challenge to Supreme Court’s suppression ruling (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]; People v King, 27 [1105]*1105AD3d 1160 [2006]). Present—Gorski, J.P., Martoche, Green, Pine and Hayes, 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 (Ronald H. Tills, A.J.), rendered October 20, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 220.06 [5]), defendant contends that he did not validly waive his right to appeal. We reject that contention (see generally People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280 [1992]). Contrary to the further contention of defendant, his general waiver of the right to appeal encompasses his present challenge to Supreme Court’s suppression ruling (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]; People v King, 27 [1105]*1105AD3d 1160 [2006]). Present—Gorski, J.P., Martoche, Green, Pine and Hayes, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.3d 1104, 815 N.Y.S.2d 870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-martinez-diaz-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack