People v. Paulino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Paulino

185 A.D.2d 1000

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

DecidedAugust 31, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 185 A.D.2d 1000 (People v. Paulino) 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. Paulino, 185 A.D.2d 1000 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals by the defendant from seven judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lakritz, J.), all rendered November 15, 1990, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (five counts, one each as to Indictment Nos. 1967/90, 1968/90, 2222/90, 2228/90, and 2603/90) and attempted murder in the second degree (two counts, one each as to Indictment Nos. 1973/90 and 2340/90), upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the appeals are dismissed.

The defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary (see, People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). We note that the defendant received legal sentences (see, Penal Law § 70.30 [1] [d]; People v Moore, 61 NY2d 575, 578; cf., People v Seaberg, supra, at 10). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

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

Appeals by the defendant from seven judgments of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lakritz, J.), all rendered November 15, 1990, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (five counts, one each as to Indictment Nos. 1967/90, 1968/90, 2222/90, 2228/90, and 2603/90) and attempted murder in the second degree (two counts, one each as to Indictment Nos. 1973/90 and 2340/90), upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the appeals are dismissed.

The defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal was knowing, intelligent and voluntary (see, People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). We note that the defendant received legal sentences (see, Penal Law § 70.30 [1] [d]; People v Moore, 61 NY2d 575, 578; cf., People v Seaberg, supra, at 10). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Miller, O’Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 A.D.2d 1000, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-paulino-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack