People v. Ramos-Roman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ramos-Roman

112 A.D.3d 1364, 976 N.Y.S.2d 918

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

DecidedDecember 27, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 112 A.D.3d 1364 (People v. Ramos-Roman) 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. Ramos-Roman, 112 A.D.3d 1364, 976 N.Y.S.2d 918 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (M. William Boiler, A.J.), rendered July 21, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]). We agree with defendant that the oral and written waivers of his right to appeal from his conviction of that crime do not encompass his challenge to the severity of his sentence and thus do not foreclose our review of that challenge (see People v Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 927-928 [2012]). We nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present — Smith, J.P, Fahey, Lindley, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (M. William Boiler, A.J.), rendered July 21, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]). We agree with defendant that the oral and written waivers of his right to appeal from his conviction of that crime do not encompass his challenge to the severity of his sentence and thus do not foreclose our review of that challenge (see People v Maracle, 19 NY3d 925, 927-928 [2012]). We nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present — Smith, J.P, Fahey, Lindley, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 A.D.3d 1364, 976 N.Y.S.2d 918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ramos-roman-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack