People v. Portillo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Portillo

294 A.D.2d 379, 741 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4768

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

DecidedMay 6, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 294 A.D.2d 379 (People v. Portillo) 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. Portillo, 294 A.D.2d 379, 741 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4768 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from two sentences of the County Court, Nassau County (Jonas, J.), both imposed December 19, 1995, on the ground that the sentences are excessive.

Ordered that the sentences are affirmed.

The defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived, without limitation, the right to appeal his convictions and sentences (see People v Moissett, 76 NY2d 909; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). Since the defendant was informed of the maximum sentences which would be imposed pursuant to the plea agreement, his general waiver of his right to appeal encompasses his claim that the agreed upon sentences, which were, in fact, imposed, were excessive (see People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825). Ritter, J.P., Florio, Goldstein, Luciano and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from two sentences of the County Court, Nassau County (Jonas, J.), both imposed December 19, 1995, on the ground that the sentences are excessive.

Ordered that the sentences are affirmed.

The defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived, without limitation, the right to appeal his convictions and sentences (see People v Moissett, 76 NY2d 909; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). Since the defendant was informed of the maximum sentences which would be imposed pursuant to the plea agreement, his general waiver of his right to appeal encompasses his claim that the agreed upon sentences, which were, in fact, imposed, were excessive (see People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825). Ritter, J.P., Florio, Goldstein, Luciano and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 379, 741 N.Y.S.2d 890, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-portillo-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack