People v. Suarez

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Suarez

434 N.E.2d 245, 55 N.Y.2d 940, 449 N.Y.S.2d 176, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3125

New York Court of Appeals·Decided February 11, 1982·Published·Cited by 49 cases

Opinion

[942] OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant’s contention that his rights under CPL 30.30 were violated was forfeited when he entered his plea of guilty (People v Friscia, 51 NY2d 845). In addition, and for the reasons stated by the Appellate Division, we find there was no violation of defendant’s constitutional right to a speedy trial (see People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442).

Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum; Chief Judge Cooke and Judge Jones taking no part.

Order affirmed.

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

[942] OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Defendant’s contention that his rights under CPL 30.30 were violated was forfeited when he entered his plea of guilty (People v Friscia, 51 NY2d 845). In addition, and for the reasons stated by the Appellate Division, we find there was no violation of defendant’s constitutional right to a speedy trial (see People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442).

Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum; Chief Judge Cooke and Judge Jones taking no part.

Order affirmed.

People v. Suarez, 434 N.E.2d 245, 55 N.Y.2d 940, 449 N.Y.S.2d 176, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3125 (N.Y. 1982).

Pincite

434 N.E.2d 245 (People v. Suarez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related