People v. Roman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Roman

243 A.D.2d 831, 665 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10112

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

DecidedOctober 16, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 243 A.D.2d 831 (People v. 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. Roman, 243 A.D.2d 831, 665 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10112 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Crew III, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Sheridan, J.), rendered March 20, 1996 in Schenectady County, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted burglary in the second degree.

Defendant, disregarding an order of protection in favor of his estranged wife, was arrested after he unlawfully entered her house through a window. As a consequence, defendant was indicted and charged with burglary in the second degree and criminal contempt in the second degree. Following a negotiated plea to attempted burglary in the second degree in satisfaction of the indictment, defendant was sentenced as a second felony offender to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 2 to 4 years. Additionally, Supreme Court entered an order of protection in favor of defendant’s estranged wife.

Contrary to defendant’s assertion, our review of the record reveals that his plea was knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made, during the course of which he admitted guilt as to each and every element of the crime (see, People v Sloan, 228 AD2d 975, lv denied 88 NY2d 994). We also reject defendant’s contention that Supreme Court erred in imposing an order of protection because the entry of such an order had not been part of the plea agreement. An order of protection, where appropriate, may be issued independent of a plea agreement (see, CPL 530.13 [4]; see also, People v Oliver, 182 AD2d 716). We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them either lacking in merit or unpreserved for our review.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Crew III, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Sheridan, J.), rendered March 20, 1996 in Schenectady County, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted burglary in the second degree.

Defendant, disregarding an order of protection in favor of his estranged wife, was arrested after he unlawfully entered her house through a window. As a consequence, defendant was indicted and charged with burglary in the second degree and criminal contempt in the second degree. Following a negotiated plea to attempted burglary in the second degree in satisfaction of the indictment, defendant was sentenced as a second felony offender to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 2 to 4 years. Additionally, Supreme Court entered an order of protection in favor of defendant’s estranged wife.

Contrary to defendant’s assertion, our review of the record reveals that his plea was knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made, during the course of which he admitted guilt as to each and every element of the crime (see, People v Sloan, 228 AD2d 975, lv denied 88 NY2d 994). We also reject defendant’s contention that Supreme Court erred in imposing an order of protection because the entry of such an order had not been part of the plea agreement. An order of protection, where appropriate, may be issued independent of a plea agreement (see, CPL 530.13 [4]; see also, People v Oliver, 182 AD2d 716). We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them either lacking in merit or unpreserved for our review.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D.2d 831, 665 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-roman-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack