People v. Quiller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Quiller

227 A.D.2d 694, 642 N.Y.S.2d 562, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4722

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

DecidedMay 2, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 227 A.D.2d 694 (People v. Quiller) 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. Quiller, 227 A.D.2d 694, 642 N.Y.S.2d 562, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4722 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Scarano, Jr., J.), rendered February 23, 1995, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

In satisfaction of a nine-count indictment charging him with various drug-related crimes, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. In accordance with the plea agreement, he was sentenced as a second felony offender to a prison term of 4xh to 9 years. We reject defendant’s initial claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because he was represented by three different attorneys from the Public Defender’s office. The record reveals that each of the attorneys who appeared on defendant’s behalf performed competently and that defendant was provided meaningful representation (see, People v Satterfield, 66 NY2d 796, 799-800; People v Nusbaum, 222 AD2d 723, 725).

In addition, we do not find that the sentence imposed is harsh or excessive. Defendant had numerous prior drug-related [695]*695convictions and was charged with nine additional drug-related crimes prior to entering his guilty plea. In view of this, as well as the fact that the sentence was agreed to by defendant, we find no reason to disturb it.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Scarano, Jr., J.), rendered February 23, 1995, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

In satisfaction of a nine-count indictment charging him with various drug-related crimes, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. In accordance with the plea agreement, he was sentenced as a second felony offender to a prison term of 4xh to 9 years. We reject defendant’s initial claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because he was represented by three different attorneys from the Public Defender’s office. The record reveals that each of the attorneys who appeared on defendant’s behalf performed competently and that defendant was provided meaningful representation (see, People v Satterfield, 66 NY2d 796, 799-800; People v Nusbaum, 222 AD2d 723, 725).

In addition, we do not find that the sentence imposed is harsh or excessive. Defendant had numerous prior drug-related [695]*695convictions and was charged with nine additional drug-related crimes prior to entering his guilty plea. In view of this, as well as the fact that the sentence was agreed to by defendant, we find no reason to disturb it.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 A.D.2d 694, 642 N.Y.S.2d 562, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4722, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-quiller-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack