People v. Migneco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Migneco

196 A.D.2d 849, 603 N.Y.S.2d 753

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 196 A.D.2d 849 (People v. Migneco) 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. Migneco, 196 A.D.2d 849, 603 N.Y.S.2d 753 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Sherman, J.), rendered June 10, 1992, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that she had violated a condition thereof, upon her admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon her previous conviction of criminal mischief in the fourth degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review her claim regarding the sufficiency of the plea allocution since she did not move to withdraw the plea (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636; People v Hunter, 194 AD2d 628).

In any event, under the circumstances of this case, the court [850]*850properly adjudicated the defendant in violation of probation based upon her admission (see, People v Hunter, supra; People v Smith, 146 AD2d 656; People v Lombardo, 108 AD2d 873). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Eiber, O’Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Sherman, J.), rendered June 10, 1992, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that she had violated a condition thereof, upon her admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon her previous conviction of criminal mischief in the fourth degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review her claim regarding the sufficiency of the plea allocution since she did not move to withdraw the plea (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636; People v Hunter, 194 AD2d 628).

In any event, under the circumstances of this case, the court [850]*850properly adjudicated the defendant in violation of probation based upon her admission (see, People v Hunter, supra; People v Smith, 146 AD2d 656; People v Lombardo, 108 AD2d 873). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Eiber, O’Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

196 A.D.2d 849, 603 N.Y.S.2d 753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-migneco-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack