People v. Melendez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Melendez

14 A.D.3d 414, 787 N.Y.S.2d 866, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 484

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

DecidedJanuary 20, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 14 A.D.3d 414 (People v. Melendez) 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. Melendez, 14 A.D.3d 414, 787 N.Y.S.2d 866, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 484 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Martin Marcus, J.), rendered June 2, 2000, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of attempted murder in the second degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 4xh to 9 years and 2 to 6 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The record establishes that defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal, and that the waiver encompassed his suppression claims (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831 [1999]). Accordingly, review of those issues is foreclosed (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 9-10 [1989]). In any event, were we to find that the waiver did not foreclose review, we would find the court properly held that there was an independent source for the complainant to make an in-court identification of defendant. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Andrias, Marlow and Ellerin, JJ.

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

Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Martin Marcus, J.), rendered June 2, 2000, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of attempted murder in the second degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 4xh to 9 years and 2 to 6 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The record establishes that defendant made a valid waiver of his right to appeal, and that the waiver encompassed his suppression claims (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831 [1999]). Accordingly, review of those issues is foreclosed (see People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 9-10 [1989]). In any event, were we to find that the waiver did not foreclose review, we would find the court properly held that there was an independent source for the complainant to make an in-court identification of defendant. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Andrias, Marlow and Ellerin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 A.D.3d 414, 787 N.Y.S.2d 866, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 484, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-melendez-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack