People v. O'Connor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. O'Connor

40 A.D.3d 1013, 834 N.Y.S.2d 668

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

DecidedMay 22, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.3d 1013 (People v. O'Connor) 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. O'Connor, 40 A.D.3d 1013, 834 N.Y.S.2d 668 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Putnam County (Miller, J.), rendered December 14, 2004, convicting him of driving while under the influence of alcohol in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 (3), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant pleaded guilty, withdrew all pretrial motions that he “made or could have . . . made,” and waived his right to appeal. The defendant’s argument that he was denied a speedy trial, to the extent that it is based on the terms of CPL 30.30, is thus for a number of different procedural reasons not properly reviewable on this appeal (see People v Holmes, 303 AD2d 690 [2003]). To the extent that this argument rests on constitutional principles, and to the extent that the defendant’s argument is thus properly reviewable on appeal irrespective of [1014]*1014the procedural bars noted above (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255 [2006]; People v Blakley, 34 NY2d 311, 314-315 [1974]), it is without merit (see generally People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442 [1975]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are not properly before this Court. Rivera, J.P., Florio, Dillon and Carni, 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, Putnam County (Miller, J.), rendered December 14, 2004, convicting him of driving while under the influence of alcohol in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 (3), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant pleaded guilty, withdrew all pretrial motions that he “made or could have . . . made,” and waived his right to appeal. The defendant’s argument that he was denied a speedy trial, to the extent that it is based on the terms of CPL 30.30, is thus for a number of different procedural reasons not properly reviewable on this appeal (see People v Holmes, 303 AD2d 690 [2003]). To the extent that this argument rests on constitutional principles, and to the extent that the defendant’s argument is thus properly reviewable on appeal irrespective of [1014]*1014the procedural bars noted above (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255 [2006]; People v Blakley, 34 NY2d 311, 314-315 [1974]), it is without merit (see generally People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442 [1975]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are not properly before this Court. Rivera, J.P., Florio, Dillon and Carni, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.3d 1013, 834 N.Y.S.2d 668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-oconnor-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack