People v. Kitchens, 46 A.D.3d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2007). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Kitchens, 46 A.D.3d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2007). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
19 citation events (19 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: People v. Youmans, 106 A.D.3d 1036 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2013)
Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2007 2016 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 578 Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant’s general waiver of his right to appeal does not foreclose review of his contention that he was denied his…4 citing casesopening of page *578 (no citing court says what it cites this page for)
  • People v. Youmans, 106 A.D.3d 1036 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2013).published 2 cites
    Although the defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal is valid, it does not preclude appellate review of his claim that he was denied his right to due process because the sentencing court did not conduct a hearing to determine if he viola…
  • People v. Arrington, 94 A.D.3d 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2012).published
    Although the defendant’s waiver is thus valid, it does not preclude review of his claim that he was denied his right to due process because the County Court did not hold an evidentiary hearing regarding the basis for his post-plea arrest o…
  • People v. Serrano, 79 A.D.3d 772 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2010).published
    Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the sentencing court conducted an inquiry sufficient to determine that he violated a condition of the plea agreement by failing to perform community service (see People v Valencia, 3 NY3d 714, 715 [2…
  • People v. Forkey, 72 A.D.3d 1209 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2010).published
    Under these circumstances, County Court’s inquiry was sufficient to determine that defendant violated the plea agreement and no formal hearing was required (see People v Saucier, 69 AD3d 1125, 1126 [2010]; People v Kitchens, 46 AD3d at 578…
Other citing cases1 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Anthony Kitchens
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 4, 2007.
Published opinion
46 A.D.3d 577
Cited by 12 opinions  |  Published

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrero, J.), rendered January 30, 2006, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

[*578] Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s general waiver of his right to appeal does not foreclose review of his contention that he was denied his right to due process when the sentencing court failed to hold a hearing into the circumstances surrounding his failure to complete a drug treatment program (see People v Garner, 18 AD3d 669 [2005]; People v Stowe, 15 AD3d 597 [2005]; People v Owens, 294 AD2d 603 [2002]). However, this issue is unpreserved for appellate review because the defendant neither requested a hearing nor moved to withdraw his plea (see People v Covington, 28 AD3d 575 [2006]; People v Garner, 18 AD3d 669 [2005]; People v Stowe, 15 AD3d 597 [2005]; People v Delgado, 14 AD3d 449 [2005]; People v Owens, 294 AD2d 603 [2002]). In any event, the court conducted an inquiry sufficient to determine that the defendant violated the plea agreement by leaving a drug treatment program after admittedly engaging in an argument with another resident (see People v Covington, 28 AD3d 575 [2006]; People v Garner, 18 AD3d 669 [2005]; see also People v Valencia, 3 NY3d 714 [2004]; cf. Torres v Berbary, 340 F3d 63 [2003]). .

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Krausman, J.E, Fisher, Angiolillo and Balkin, JJ., concur.