PIERCE, REGINALD O., PEOPLE v

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 30, 2016
DocketKA 14-01526
StatusPublished

This text of PIERCE, REGINALD O., PEOPLE v (PIERCE, REGINALD O., PEOPLE v) 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
PIERCE, REGINALD O., PEOPLE v, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

739 KA 14-01526 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, DEJOSEPH, TROUTMAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

REGINALD O. PIERCE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (ROBERT L. KEMP OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL J. FLAHERTY, JR., ACTING DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (ASHLEY R. LOWRY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Christopher J. Burns, J.), rendered June 19, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [2]) and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (§ 265.02 [1]). Initially, we note that, “[b]y pleading guilty, defendant forfeited review of [Supreme] Court’s Molineux ruling” (People v Brown, 305 AD2d 1068, 1068, lv denied 100 NY2d 579). Contrary to defendant’s contention, the court properly refused to suppress his statements to the police inasmuch as the record establishes that defendant spoke “freely and unguardedly” in the presence of two different police officers after voluntarily waiving his Miranda rights (People v Cascio, 79 AD3d 1809, 1811, lv denied 16 NY3d 893; see People v Carbonaro, 134 AD3d 1543, 1547-1548, lv denied 27 NY3d 994, reconsideration denied 27 NY3d 1149; People v Collins, 43 AD3d 1338, 1339, lv denied 9 NY3d 1005). Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Entered: September 30, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

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

Related

People v. Collins
43 A.D.3d 1338 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Cascio
79 A.D.3d 1809 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Carbonaro
134 A.D.3d 1543 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
People v. Brown
305 A.D.2d 1068 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
PIERCE, REGINALD O., PEOPLE v, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pierce-reginald-o-people-v-nyappdiv-2016.