People v. Pizetzky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pizetzky

46 A.D.3d 709, 846 N.Y.S.2d 589

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

DecidedDecember 11, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 46 A.D.3d 709 (People v. Pizetzky) 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. Pizetzky, 46 A.D.3d 709, 846 N.Y.S.2d 589 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County [710]*710(Gazzillo, J.), rendered September 28, 2004, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, a sentenced federal prisoner, was produced from federal custody to appear in proceedings in Suffolk County with respect to the instant indictment. On appeal, he contends that his conviction should be reversed and the indictment dismissed because he was returned to federal custody prior to a trial on this indictment, and therefore Suffolk County violated his rights under article IV (e) of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, which directs that an indictment be dismissed where “trial is not had” on such indictment “prior to the prisoner’s [sic] being returned to the original place of imprisonment” (CPL 580.20 [IV] [e]; see generally Alabama v Bozeman, 533 US 146 [2001]). However, appellate review of this issue is foreclosed by his plea of guilty (see People v Parilla, 8 NY3d 654 [2007]; People v Hansen, 95 NY2d 227 [2000]), as well as by his knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Dixon, 41 AD3d 861 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 922 [2007]; People v Barnes, 41 AD3d 613 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 921 [2007]). Schmidt, J.P., Skelos, Covello and Balkin, 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, Suffolk County [710]*710(Gazzillo, J.), rendered September 28, 2004, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, a sentenced federal prisoner, was produced from federal custody to appear in proceedings in Suffolk County with respect to the instant indictment. On appeal, he contends that his conviction should be reversed and the indictment dismissed because he was returned to federal custody prior to a trial on this indictment, and therefore Suffolk County violated his rights under article IV (e) of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, which directs that an indictment be dismissed where “trial is not had” on such indictment “prior to the prisoner’s [sic] being returned to the original place of imprisonment” (CPL 580.20 [IV] [e]; see generally Alabama v Bozeman, 533 US 146 [2001]). However, appellate review of this issue is foreclosed by his plea of guilty (see People v Parilla, 8 NY3d 654 [2007]; People v Hansen, 95 NY2d 227 [2000]), as well as by his knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Dixon, 41 AD3d 861 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 922 [2007]; People v Barnes, 41 AD3d 613 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 921 [2007]). Schmidt, J.P., Skelos, Covello and Balkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 A.D.3d 709, 846 N.Y.S.2d 589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pizetzky-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack