People v. Sears

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sears

2016 NY Slip Op 7981, 144 A.D.3d 1056, 40 N.Y.S.3d 908

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

DecidedNovember 23, 2016

Docket2013-11068

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 2016 NY Slip Op 7981 (People v. Sears) 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. Sears, 2016 NY Slip Op 7981, 144 A.D.3d 1056, 40 N.Y.S.3d 908 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered November 21, 2013, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Under the circumstances of this case, including the defendant’s background, which includes a prior felony conviction from which an appeal was taken (see People v Sears, 9 AD3d 472 [2004]), we conclude that the defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal was valid (see People v Sanders, 25 NY3d 337, 340-342 [2015]; cf. People v Zaffuto, 138 AD3d 1156 [2016]; see generally People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133, 138 [2014]). The defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of the denial of that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]; People v Cannon, 123 AD3d 1138 [2014]; People v Vaiana, 119 AD3d 879 [2014]).

Dillon, J.P., Hinds-Radix, Maltese and Barros, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered November 21, 2013, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Under the circumstances of this case, including the defendant’s background, which includes a prior felony conviction from which an appeal was taken (see People v Sears, 9 AD3d 472 [2004]), we conclude that the defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal was valid (see People v Sanders, 25 NY3d 337, 340-342 [2015]; cf. People v Zaffuto, 138 AD3d 1156 [2016]; see generally People v Brown, 122 AD3d 133, 138 [2014]). The defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of the denial of that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence (see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831, 833 [1999]; People v Cannon, 123 AD3d 1138 [2014]; People v Vaiana, 119 AD3d 879 [2014]).

Dillon, J.P., Hinds-Radix, Maltese and Barros, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2016 NY Slip Op 7981, 144 A.D.3d 1056, 40 N.Y.S.3d 908, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sears-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack