People v. Matos
191 A.D.2d 1048, 595 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3056
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Matos. Read the opinion of the Court — 165 A.D.2d 767 →
Opinion
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The record does not reflect that defendant made a voluntary, knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to appeal (compare, People v Moissett, 76 NY2d 909; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11). Upon our review of the issue whether the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive, we conclude that it lacks merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 2nd Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Balio, Lawton, Boomer and Davis, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Matos, 191 A.D.2d 1048, 595 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3056 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).
191 A.D.2d 1048 (People v. Matos) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Seaberg
541 N.E.2d 1022 (New York Court of Appeals, 1989)
People v. Moissett
564 N.E.2d 653 (New York Court of Appeals, 1990)