People v. Tano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tano

260 A.D.2d 511, 686 N.Y.S.2d 333, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3806

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

DecidedApril 12, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 260 A.D.2d 511 (People v. Tano) 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. Tano, 260 A.D.2d 511, 686 N.Y.S.2d 333, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3806 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered September 26, 1997, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree under Indictment No. 96-00492, and (2) a judgment of the same court, rendered February 11, 1998, convicting him of bail jumping in the second degree under Indictment No. 97-00436, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to the factual sufficiency of his plea allocution to attempted robbery in the first degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636), and in any event is precluded because he pleaded guilty to a lesser offense than that charged in the indictment (see, People v Pelchat, 62 NY2d 97, 108; People v Hanson, 229 AD2d 504).

We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit (see, People v Lazzaro, 180 AD2d 696; People v Littlejohn, 172 AD2d 776). Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered September 26, 1997, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree under Indictment No. 96-00492, and (2) a judgment of the same court, rendered February 11, 1998, convicting him of bail jumping in the second degree under Indictment No. 97-00436, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to the factual sufficiency of his plea allocution to attempted robbery in the first degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636), and in any event is precluded because he pleaded guilty to a lesser offense than that charged in the indictment (see, People v Pelchat, 62 NY2d 97, 108; People v Hanson, 229 AD2d 504).

We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit (see, People v Lazzaro, 180 AD2d 696; People v Littlejohn, 172 AD2d 776). Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D.2d 511, 686 N.Y.S.2d 333, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3806, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tano-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack