People v. Moore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Moore

58 A.D.3d 1022, 870 N.Y.S.2d 806

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

DecidedJanuary 22, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 58 A.D.3d 1022 (People v. Moore) 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. Moore, 58 A.D.3d 1022, 870 N.Y.S.2d 806 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Washington County (McKeighan, J), rendered February 14, 2008, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

Waiving her right to appeal, defendant pleaded guilty to promoting prison contraband in the first degree. County Court thereafter sentenced defendant as negotiated to six months in jail and five years of probation. Defendant now appeals.

The sole contention advanced by defendant is that the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive. She is precluded from making such a challenge, however, given that she validly waived her right to appeal (see People v Wilson, 53 AD3d 928, 929 [2008]). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Cardona, PJ., Peters, Lahtinen, Kane and Stein, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Washington County (McKeighan, J), rendered February 14, 2008, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of the crime of promoting prison contraband in the first degree.

Waiving her right to appeal, defendant pleaded guilty to promoting prison contraband in the first degree. County Court thereafter sentenced defendant as negotiated to six months in jail and five years of probation. Defendant now appeals.

The sole contention advanced by defendant is that the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive. She is precluded from making such a challenge, however, given that she validly waived her right to appeal (see People v Wilson, 53 AD3d 928, 929 [2008]). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Cardona, PJ., Peters, Lahtinen, Kane and Stein, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 A.D.3d 1022, 870 N.Y.S.2d 806, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-moore-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack