People v. Silmon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Silmon

186 A.D.2d 1056, 590 N.Y.S.2d 781, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11674

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

DecidedOctober 7, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 1056 (People v. Silmon) 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. Silmon, 186 A.D.2d 1056, 590 N.Y.S.2d 781, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11674 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from adjudication insofar as it imposes sentence of incarceration unanimously dismissed as moot and otherwise adjudication affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from an adjudication convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of petit larceny, defendant argues that his waiver of his right to appeal was invalid. We agree that defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made (see, People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11). Defendant’s argument on appeal that his sentence of incarceration was harsh and excessive is moot, however, because that sentence has now been served. We have examined defendant’s remaining argument on appeal and find it to be without merit. (Appeal from Adjudication of Erie County Court, LaMendola, J. — Youthful Offender.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Fallon and Doerr, JJ.

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

— Appeal from adjudication insofar as it imposes sentence of incarceration unanimously dismissed as moot and otherwise adjudication affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from an adjudication convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of petit larceny, defendant argues that his waiver of his right to appeal was invalid. We agree that defendant’s waiver of his right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made (see, People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11). Defendant’s argument on appeal that his sentence of incarceration was harsh and excessive is moot, however, because that sentence has now been served. We have examined defendant’s remaining argument on appeal and find it to be without merit. (Appeal from Adjudication of Erie County Court, LaMendola, J. — Youthful Offender.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Fallon and Doerr, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 1056, 590 N.Y.S.2d 781, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-silmon-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack