People v. Stanton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Stanton

31 A.D.3d 1219, 817 N.Y.S.2d 558

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

DecidedJuly 7, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.3d 1219 (People v. Stanton) 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. Stanton, 31 A.D.3d 1219, 817 N.Y.S.2d 558 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Cayuga County Court (Mark H. Fandrich, J.), rendered December 9, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 220.31). The valid waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses his contention concerning the severity of the sentence (see People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]). Although the further contention of defendant that he was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial survives both the waiver of the right to appeal and the guilty plea (see People v Campbell, 97 NY2d 532, 535 [2002]; People v Taylor, 65 NY2d 1, 5 [1985]), that contention is lacking in merit (see generally People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442, 444-445 [1975]). Present—Scudder, J.P., Kehoe, Smith, Pine and Hayes, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Cayuga County Court (Mark H. Fandrich, J.), rendered December 9, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 220.31). The valid waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses his contention concerning the severity of the sentence (see People v Lococo, 92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]). Although the further contention of defendant that he was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial survives both the waiver of the right to appeal and the guilty plea (see People v Campbell, 97 NY2d 532, 535 [2002]; People v Taylor, 65 NY2d 1, 5 [1985]), that contention is lacking in merit (see generally People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442, 444-445 [1975]). Present—Scudder, J.P., Kehoe, Smith, Pine and Hayes, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.3d 1219, 817 N.Y.S.2d 558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stanton-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack