People v. Talley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Talley

112 A.D.3d 1347, 977 N.Y.S.2d 526

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

DecidedDecember 27, 2013

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 112 A.D.3d 1347 (People v. Talley) 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. Talley, 112 A.D.3d 1347, 977 N.Y.S.2d 526 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Gerald J. Whalen, J.), rendered July 11, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 220.09 [1]), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal is unenforceable and that his sentence is unduly harsh and severe. The record demonstrates, however, that Supreme Court “engage [d] the defendant in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice” (People v Burt, 101 AD3d 1729, 1730 [2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1060 [2013] [internal quotation marks omitted]), and that defendant also signed a written waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Pulley, 107 AD3d 1560, 1561 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 1076 [2013]). We thus conclude that the waiver is enforceable and that defendant is thereby foreclosed from challenging the severity of his sentence (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Suttles, 107 AD3d 1467, 1468 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 1046 [2013]). Present — Scudder, PJ., Smith, Peradotto, Lindley and Sconiers, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Gerald J. Whalen, J.), rendered July 11, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 220.09 [1]), defendant contends that his waiver of the right to appeal is unenforceable and that his sentence is unduly harsh and severe. The record demonstrates, however, that Supreme Court “engage [d] the defendant in an adequate colloquy to ensure that the waiver of the right to appeal was a knowing and voluntary choice” (People v Burt, 101 AD3d 1729, 1730 [2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1060 [2013] [internal quotation marks omitted]), and that defendant also signed a written waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Pulley, 107 AD3d 1560, 1561 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 1076 [2013]). We thus conclude that the waiver is enforceable and that defendant is thereby foreclosed from challenging the severity of his sentence (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Suttles, 107 AD3d 1467, 1468 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 1046 [2013]). Present — Scudder, PJ., Smith, Peradotto, Lindley and Sconiers, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 A.D.3d 1347, 977 N.Y.S.2d 526, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-talley-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack