People v. Reynolds

27 A.D.3d 668, 811 N.Y.S.2d 128
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 21, 2006
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 27 A.D.3d 668 (People v. Reynolds) 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. Reynolds, 27 A.D.3d 668, 811 N.Y.S.2d 128 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

[669]*669Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (DeRosa, J.), rendered August 24, 2004, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that his plea of guilty and waiver of the right to appeal were not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Everett, 22 AD3d 863 [2005]; People v Huchital, 22 AD3d 681 [2005]; People v Jones, 21 AD3d 968, 969 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 754 [2005]). In any event, the record establishes that the plea of guilty and waiver of his right to appeal were knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v Everett, supra; People v Jones, supra). The defendant acknowledged that he discussed the plea and waiver with his attorney, executed the waiver in open court, and indicated his understanding of the nature and consequences of the rights that he waived (see People v Torres, 24 AD3d 692 [2005]). The defendant’s contention that the defense counsel was ineffective for failing to move for a suppression hearing and that this rendered his plea of guilty involuntarily or unknowingly made is without merit.

The defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his remaining claims (see People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733 [1998]; People v Everett, supra; People v Jones, supra). Adams, J.P., Ritter, Santucci and Lunn, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Fisher
63 A.D.3d 756 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
People v. Luster
45 A.D.3d 866 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Dixon
41 A.D.3d 861 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Silent
37 A.D.3d 625 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Lawrence
32 A.D.3d 969 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
27 A.D.3d 668, 811 N.Y.S.2d 128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-reynolds-nyappdiv-2006.