People v. Sawyer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sawyer

107 A.D.2d 725, 484 N.Y.S.2d 83, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49832

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

DecidedJanuary 14, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 107 A.D.2d 725 (People v. Sawyer) 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. Sawyer, 107 A.D.2d 725, 484 N.Y.S.2d 83, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49832 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeals by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vetrano, J.), both rendered December 16, 1981, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his pleas of guilty, and sentencing him as a second violent felony offender.

Judgments affirmed.

Defendant failed to raise before Criminal Term the argument that he should be relieved of his guilty pleas, and therefore the [726]*726issue is not preserved for review (People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636; People v Guerra, 99 AD2d 787). Moreover, upon examining the record we find that defendant, who was represented by counsel, refused Criminal Term’s offer, after the imposition of the sentences, to permit him to withdraw his pleas and go to trial. We further find that defendant was correctly sentenced as a second violent felony offender. Finally, in view of the fact that he received the minimum sentences permitted by law (Penal Law, § 70.04, subd 3, par [a]), any claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because no objection was made to the length of the sentences is specious. Mollen, P. J., Bracken, O’Connor and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeals by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vetrano, J.), both rendered December 16, 1981, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon his pleas of guilty, and sentencing him as a second violent felony offender.

Judgments affirmed.

Defendant failed to raise before Criminal Term the argument that he should be relieved of his guilty pleas, and therefore the [726]*726issue is not preserved for review (People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636; People v Guerra, 99 AD2d 787). Moreover, upon examining the record we find that defendant, who was represented by counsel, refused Criminal Term’s offer, after the imposition of the sentences, to permit him to withdraw his pleas and go to trial. We further find that defendant was correctly sentenced as a second violent felony offender. Finally, in view of the fact that he received the minimum sentences permitted by law (Penal Law, § 70.04, subd 3, par [a]), any claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because no objection was made to the length of the sentences is specious. Mollen, P. J., Bracken, O’Connor and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 A.D.2d 725, 484 N.Y.S.2d 83, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49832, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sawyer-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack