People v. Worrell

2018 NY Slip Op 179
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 10, 2018
Docket2016-03707
StatusPublished

This text of 2018 NY Slip Op 179 (People v. Worrell) 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. Worrell, 2018 NY Slip Op 179 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

People v Worrell (2018 NY Slip Op 00179)
People v Worrell
2018 NY Slip Op 00179
Decided on January 10, 2018
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on January 10, 2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
SHERI S. ROMAN, J.P.
ROBERT J. MILLER
COLLEEN D. DUFFY
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.

2016-03707
(Ind. No. 9960/10)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

Joshua Worrell, appellant.


Paul Skip Laisure, New York, NY, for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove, Sholom J. Twersky, and Gregory Musso of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Foley, J.), imposed April 20, 2016, upon his conviction of attempted robbery in the second degree,



DECISION & ORDER

upon his plea of guilty, after remittitur from this Court for resentencing (see People v Worrell, 134 AD3d 1137).

ORDERED that the resentence is affirmed.

The record demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v McCray, 145 AD3d 740; see generally People v Sanders, 25 NY3d 337, 341-342; People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738). The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his contention that the sentencing court should have resentenced him as a youthful offender (see People v Pacherille, 25 NY3d 1021, 1024; People v McCray, 145 AD3d 740; People v White, 141 AD3d 463, 464; People v Drammeh, 100 AD3d 650, 651; People v Franko, 98 AD3d 525).

ROMAN, J.P., MILLER, DUFFY and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

The People v. Anthony N. Pacherille
32 N.E.3d 393 (New York Court of Appeals, 2015)
The People v. Rasaun Sanders
34 N.E.3d 344 (New York Court of Appeals, 2015)
People v. Worrell
134 A.D.3d 1137 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
People v. White
141 A.D.3d 463 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
People v. McCray
2016 NY Slip Op 8247 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
People v. Ramos
853 N.E.2d 222 (New York Court of Appeals, 2006)
People v. Franko
98 A.D.3d 525 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Drammeh
100 A.D.3d 650 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2018 NY Slip Op 179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-worrell-nyappdiv-2018.