People v. Rojas

129 A.D.3d 747, 9 N.Y.S.3d 583
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 3, 2015
Docket2014-01543
StatusPublished

This text of 129 A.D.3d 747 (People v. Rojas) 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. Rojas, 129 A.D.3d 747, 9 N.Y.S.3d 583 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from an amended resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Morgenstern, J.), imposed March 17, 2014, on the ground that the amended resentence was excessive. The defendant’s notice of appeal from a resentence of the same court imposed January 28, 2014, is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the amended resentence imposed March 17, 2014 (see CPL 460.10 [1] [b]).

Ordered that the amended resentence is affirmed.

The defendant’s purported waiver of his right to appeal was invalid (see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 265 [2011]). However, the amended resentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

Eng, P.J., Dillon, Leventhal, Hinds-Radix and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Bradshaw
961 N.E.2d 645 (New York Court of Appeals, 2011)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
129 A.D.3d 747, 9 N.Y.S.3d 583, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rojas-nyappdiv-2015.