People v. Stala

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Stala

167 A.D.2d 569, 563 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13037

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

DecidedNovember 1, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 167 A.D.2d 569 (People v. Stala) 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. Stala, 167 A.D.2d 569, 563 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13037 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Monserrate, J.), rendered December 9, 1988, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of sexual abuse in the first degree and sodomy in the second degree (two counts).

At the time of defendant’s plea, he stated that he understood that he could receive a prison term of up to seven years and that because the charges were for separate crimes he could receive consecutive sentences. He nevertheless stated that he still wished to plead guilty. These circumstances, coupled with the facts admitted by defendant at the plea allocution, do not warrant disturbing the three consecutive 2-to-6-year prison terms imposed by County Court (see, People v Donnelly, 103 AD2d 941). With respect to defendant’s remaining contentions, they have either been found unpreserved for review or lacking in merit.

Judgment affirmed. Kane, J. P., Weiss, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Monserrate, J.), rendered December 9, 1988, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of sexual abuse in the first degree and sodomy in the second degree (two counts).

At the time of defendant’s plea, he stated that he understood that he could receive a prison term of up to seven years and that because the charges were for separate crimes he could receive consecutive sentences. He nevertheless stated that he still wished to plead guilty. These circumstances, coupled with the facts admitted by defendant at the plea allocution, do not warrant disturbing the three consecutive 2-to-6-year prison terms imposed by County Court (see, People v Donnelly, 103 AD2d 941). With respect to defendant’s remaining contentions, they have either been found unpreserved for review or lacking in merit.

Judgment affirmed. Kane, J. P., Weiss, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 A.D.2d 569, 563 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13037, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stala-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack