People v. Mercer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mercer

204 A.D.2d 741, 614 N.Y.S.2d 244

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

DecidedMay 31, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 204 A.D.2d 741 (People v. Mercer) 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. Mercer, 204 A.D.2d 741, 614 N.Y.S.2d 244 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant, as limited by her motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Westchester County (Scarpino, J.), imposed June 11, 1992, the sentence being an indeterminate term of 4 to 12 years imprisonment, upon her conviction of attempted murder in the second degree, after a plea of guilty.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the record demonstrates that she knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived her right to appeal as part of the plea agreement (see, People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). In any event, having pleaded guilty with the understanding that she could receive a maximum sentence of 4 to 12 years, which was thereafter imposed, the defendant has no basis to now complain that her sentence was excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Miller, Copertino and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant, as limited by her motion, from a sentence of the County Court, Westchester County (Scarpino, J.), imposed June 11, 1992, the sentence being an indeterminate term of 4 to 12 years imprisonment, upon her conviction of attempted murder in the second degree, after a plea of guilty.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the record demonstrates that she knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived her right to appeal as part of the plea agreement (see, People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). In any event, having pleaded guilty with the understanding that she could receive a maximum sentence of 4 to 12 years, which was thereafter imposed, the defendant has no basis to now complain that her sentence was excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Miller, Copertino and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 A.D.2d 741, 614 N.Y.S.2d 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mercer-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack