People v. Jackson, 129 A.D.3d 1342 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Jackson, 129 A.D.3d 1342 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
15 citation events (15 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: People v. Williams (nyappdiv, 2024-06-14)
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Williams
N.Y. App. Div. · 2024 · confidence medium
Defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal ( see generally People v Lopez , 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]), and the valid waiver encompasses his challenge in his main brief to County Court's suppression ruling ( see People v Sanders , 25 NY3d 337, 342 [2015]; People v Snyder , 151 AD3d 1939 , 1939 [4th Dept 2017]), his non-jurisdictional challenge in his pro se supplemental brief to the residency of the assistant district attorneys who pursued the charges against him ( see People v Jackson , 129 AD3d 1342, 1343 [3d Dept 2015]; see generally Matter of Haggerty v Him…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Tisdale
N.Y. App. Div. · 2022 · confidence medium
Finally, defendant's further contention that the indictment was duplicitous and multiplicitous was forfeited by defendant's guilty plea and, in any event, the waiver of the right to appeal encompasses that contention ( see People v Jackson , 129 AD3d 1342, 1342-1343 [3d Dept 2015]; People v Slingerland , 101 AD3d 1265 , 1266 [3d Dept 2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1104 [2013]; People v Nichols , 32 AD3d 1316, 1317 [4th Dept 2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 848 [2007], reconsideration denied 8 NY3d 988 [2007]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Tisdale
N.Y. App. Div. · 2022 · confidence medium
Finally, defendant's further contention that the indictment was duplicitous and multiplicitous was forfeited by defendant's guilty plea and, in any event, the waiver of the right to appeal encompasses that contention ( see People v Jackson , 129 AD3d 1342, 1342-1343 [3d Dept 2015]; People v Slingerland , 101 AD3d 1265 , 1266 [3d Dept 2012], lv denied 20 NY3d 1104 [2013]; People v Nichols , 32 AD3d 1316, 1317 [4th Dept 2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 848 [2007], reconsideration denied 8 NY3d 988 [2007]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Tietje
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · confidence medium
In addition, County Court confirmed that defense counsel had discussed the waiver of appeal with defendant and that defendant had no further questions regarding the written appeal waiver prior to signing it in open court ( see People v Bradshaw , 18 NY3d 257, 264-265 [2011]; [*2]People v Williams , 167 AD3d 1084 , 1085 [2018], lvs denied ___ NY3d ___ [Feb. 7, 2019]; People v McClain , 165 AD3d 1345 , 1345-1346 [2018]; People v Jackson , 129 AD3d 1342, 1342 [2015]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Price
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
The defendant’s nonjurisdictional claims that the indictment was factually insufficient and that the counts were duplicitous, raised in point V of his pro se supplemental brief, are precluded from appellate review by his valid appeal waiver (see People v Palladino, 140 AD3d 1194, 1195 [2016]; People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342-1343 [2015]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Dunkelberger
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
The court also confirmed that defendant had sufficient time to discuss her waiver with defense counsel and that she understood its ramifications; defendant also executed a detailed written waiver in open court (see People v Mayo, 130 AD3d 1099, 1100 [2015]; People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342 [2015]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Case
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
Accordingly, we find that the appeal waiver was knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256-257 [2006]; *1240 People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342 [2015]; People v Toback, 125 AD3d 1060, 1061 [2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 993 [2015]), precluding her challenges to the sentence as harsh and excessive and to the adequacy of the plea allocution (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256 ; People v Atkinson, 124 AD3d 1149, 1150 [2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 949 [2015]; People v Rapp, 133 AD3d 979, 979 [2015]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Lewis
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
His challenge to the count of the indictment to which he pleaded guilty as duplicitous is not preserved *1348 for our review (see People v Allen, 24 NY3d 441, 449-450 [2014]) 2 and, in any event, it was waived by his guilty plea (see People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342-1343 [2015]; People v Vega, 268 AD2d 686, 687 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 839 [2000]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Page
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
His remaining argument, that Supreme Court erred in failing to defer payment of the mandatory surcharge and fees, is unpreserved due to his failure to request that relief before Supreme Court (see People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342 [2015]; People v Abdus-Samad, 274 AD2d 666, 666-667 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 862 [2000]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Belile
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
Consequently, the valid appeal waiver precludes defendant’s challenge to the sentence as harsh and excessive (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256 ; People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342 [2015]). *1462 Next, defendant argues that County Court incorrectly calculated the expiration date of the permanent orders of protection by failing to factor in jail time credit (see Penal Law § 70.30 [3]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Johnson
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
As a threshold matter, we find that defendant’s waiver of appeal was knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; see also People v Sanders, 25 NY3d 337, 340-341 [2015]; People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342 [2015]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Sawyer
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
Accordingly, the record amply demonstrates that defendant’s appeal waiver was knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256-257 [2006]; People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342 [2015]; People v Toback, 125 AD3d 1060, 1061 [2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 993 [2015]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) People v. Rubio
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Consequently, the valid waiver precludes review of his challenge to the sentence as harsh and excessive (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256 ; People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342 [2015]).
discussed Cited "see" People v. Hughes
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
Defendant’s challenge to the waiver of appeal is belied by the record, which reflects that County Court made clear its “separate and distinct” nature, explained the right being waived and confirmed that defendant understood it and had no questions, prior to signing the written appeal waiver in court (People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; see People v Jackson, 129 AD3d 1342, 1342 [2015]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Marcus Jackson, Appellant
106593.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Jun 18, 2015.
129 A.D.3d 1342
Garry, Lahtinen, Egan, Rose.
Cited by 15 opinions  |  Published
Garry, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered October 22, 2013, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of rape in the third degree.

Defendant entered a guilty plea to rape in the third degree, admitting that he had sexual intercourse with a 15-year-old girl when he was 22 years old. Pursuant to the plea agreement, he waived his right to appeal and was sentenced to a two-year prison term to be followed by 10 years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.

As an initial matter, the record reflects that defendant’s appeal waiver was knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280 [1992]). County Court carefully explained the nature of the right being waived, including that it was separate and distinct from the trial-related rights automatically forfeited upon a guilty plea, ascertained that defendant had discussed it with his attorney and had no questions about it, and defendant signed a written waiver of appeal in open court (see People v Bradshaw, 18 NY3d 257, 264-265 [2011]; People v Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738 [2006]; People v Toback, 125 AD3d 1060, 1061 [2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 993 [2015]). The valid appeal waiver precludes defendant’s challenge to the sentence as harsh and excessive (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d at 255-256; People v Handly, 122 AD3d 1007, 1008 [2014]).

Defendant’s further claims that he was not advised that there would be mandatory surcharges and that County Court should have waived them were not raised before that court and, thus, are not preserved (see People v Young, 81 AD3d 995, 996 [2011], lv denied 16 NY3d 901 [2011]). In any event, we would have found no merit to these claims (see People v Hoti, 12 NY3d 742, 743 [2009]; People v Guerrero, 12 NY3d 45, 47 [2009]). Defendant’s challenge to the indictment as duplicitous was forfeited by his guilty plea and appeal waiver, unless this constitutes a jurisdictional defect (see People v Iannone, 45[*1343] NY2d 589, 600-601 [1978]; People v Motz, 52 AD3d 1029, 1030 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 791 [2008]). The claim of duplicity (see People v Alonzo, 16 NY3d 267, 269 [2011]) does not constitute a jurisdictional defect (see People v Vega, 268 AD2d 686, 687 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 839 [2000]) and, thus, this claim was forfeited (see People v Cole, 118 AD3d 1098, 1099-1100 [2014]).

Lahtinen, J.P., Egan Jr. and Rose, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.