People v. Morrisey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Morrisey

62 A.D.3d 912, 878 N.Y.S.2d 628

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

DecidedMay 19, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 62 A.D.3d 912 (People v. Morrisey) 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. Morrisey, 62 A.D.3d 912, 878 N.Y.S.2d 628 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (De Rosa, J.), rendered May 14, 2008, convicting him of criminal sale of controlled substance in or near school grounds, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contentions that the sentence imposed was excessive and that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel except to the extent that the alleged ineffective assistance affected the voluntariness of his plea (see People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738 [2006]; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255 [2006]; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1 [1989]; People v Perez, 51 AD3d 1043 [2008]). Since the defendant does not claim that the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel affected the voluntariness of his plea, the judgment must be affirmed. Mastro, J.P., Fisher, Miller, Dickerson and Chambers, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (De Rosa, J.), rendered May 14, 2008, convicting him of criminal sale of controlled substance in or near school grounds, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contentions that the sentence imposed was excessive and that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel except to the extent that the alleged ineffective assistance affected the voluntariness of his plea (see People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738 [2006]; People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255 [2006]; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1 [1989]; People v Perez, 51 AD3d 1043 [2008]). Since the defendant does not claim that the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel affected the voluntariness of his plea, the judgment must be affirmed. Mastro, J.P., Fisher, Miller, Dickerson and Chambers, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 A.D.3d 912, 878 N.Y.S.2d 628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-morrisey-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack