People v. Cisneros, 115 A.D.3d 1117 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). · Go Syfert
People v. Cisneros, 115 A.D.3d 1117 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: People v. Smalls (nyappdiv, 2015-05-28)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Smalls
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Defendant’s remaining claim, that the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive, is precluded by her unchallenged appeal waiver (see People v Cisneros, 115 AD3d 1117, 1117 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 959 [2014]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Smalls
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Defendant’s remaining claim, that the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive, is precluded by her unchallenged appeal waiver (see People v Cisneros, 115 AD3d 1117, 1117 [2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 959 [2014]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Jimmy Cisneros
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Mar 27, 2014.
115 A.D.3d 1117
Egan, Garry, Lahtinen, McCarthy.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
Garry, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County (Richards, J.), rendered June 9, 2008, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of rape in the first degree.

In satisfaction of an eight-count indictment charging him with committing various sexual acts involving two underage victims, defendant admitted to engaging in sexual intercourse with an 11-year-old child and pleaded guilty to one count of rape in the first degree. In connection with that plea, he waived the right to appeal his conviction and sentence orally and in writing. Defendant was subsequently sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement to seven years in prison, to be followed by five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals, arguing that the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive.

We affirm. “Defendant is precluded from raising [his] claim of harsh and excessive sentence given [his] unchallenged waiver of the right to appeal” (People v Wiley, 112 AD3d 998, 998 [2013] [citations omitted]; see People v Jeske, 55 AD3d 1057, 1058-1059 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 898 [2008]). Therefore, we find no reason to disturb the judgment of conviction.

Lahtinen, J.E, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.