People v. James, 269 A.D.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. James, 269 A.D.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases · …is based on information outside the record before us and is therefore properly raised by a cpl article 440 motion at p. 846 ✓ Topic ↗
11 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: People v. Whorley (nyappdiv, 2015-02-13)
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Whorley
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
To the extent that defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because of advice he received from his attorney, that contention “is based on information outside the record before us and is therefore properly raised by a CPL article 440 motion” (People v James, 269 AD2d 845, 846 [2000]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Whorley
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
To the extent that defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because of advice he received from his attorney, that contention “is based on information outside the record before us and is therefore properly raised by a CPL article 440 motion” (People v James, 269 AD2d 845, 846 [2000]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Johnson
N.Y. App. Div. · 2009 · confidence medium
However, because the defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is based upon matter dehors the record, the defendant’s claim is not properly before this Court on direct appeal (see People v Maldonado, 61 AD3d 1220 [2009]; People v James, 269 AD2d 845, 846 [2000]; People v Juhans, 147 AD2d 658 [1989]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Maldonado
N.Y. App. Div. · 2009 · confidence medium
Moreover, any claim that defendant’s decision to plead guilty was based upon counsel’s advice as to the import of County Court’s suppression decision deals with matters outside of the record and should be raised in a CPL article 440 motion (see People v Cruz, 53 AD3d 986 [2008]; People v James, 269 AD2d 845, 846 [2000]; People v Harris, 109 AD2d 351, 360 [1985], lv denied 66 NY2d 919 [1985]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Hall
N.Y. App. Div. · 2008 · confidence medium
We further note that, to the extent that defendant’s contention is based on defense counsel’s alleged failure to negotiate a plea bargain, it involves matters outside the record and thus is properly raised by way of a motion pursuant to CPL article 440 (see People v Ballard, 13 AD3d 670 , 672 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 796 [2005]; People v James, 269 AD2d 845, 846 [2000]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Bald
N.Y. App. Div. · 2006 · confidence medium
“Because defendant has completed serving the sentence imposed, his contention that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe has been rendered moot” (People v Benson, 6 AD3d 1173, 1173 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 636 [2004]; see People v Parente, 4 AD3d 793 [2004]; People v James, 269 AD2d 845, 846 [2000]), and we therefore need not reach defendant’s contention with respect to the alleged invalidity of the waiver of the right to appeal.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Benson
N.Y. App. Div. · 2004 · confidence medium
Because defendant has completed serving the sentence imposed, his contention that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe has been rendered moot (see People v Parente, 4 AD3d 793 [2004]; People v James, 269 AD2d 845, 846 [2000]; People v Griffin, 239 AD2d 936 [1997]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) People v. Flowers
N.Y. App. Div. · 2003 · confidence medium
That contention involves matters outside the record and thus is not reviewable on this appeal (see People v James, 269 AD2d 845, 846 [2000]; see also People v Royal, 306 AD2d 886 [2003]).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." People v. Campbell
N.Y. App. Div. · 2001 · signal: see also · confidence low
Contrary to the contention of defendant, he received effective assistance of counsel at resentencing (see, People v Felder, 235 AD2d 432 , lv denied 89 NY2d 985 ; see also, People v James, 269 AD2d 845, 846 ; People v Bruce, 259 AD2d 1005, 1006 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Todd F. James
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Feb 16, 2000.
269 A.D.2d 845
2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1789
Cited by 10 opinions  |  Published

—Appeal from judgment insofar as it imposes sentence of incarceration unanimously dismissed and judgment affirmed. Memorandum: We previously held this case, reserved decision, granted the motion of appellate counsel to be relieved of his assignment and directed the assignment of new appellate counsel (People v James, 252 AD2d 997). We now conclude that County Court properly proceeded with defendant’s sentencing. At sentencing, defendant stated to the court that the assigned counsel who represented him at the time of his plea of guilty “more or less told me to plead guilty to something I didn’t do.” Defendant was then represented by a different member of the Public Defender’s office, who made an oral application for the Public Defender’s office to be relieved as defendant’s counsel because defendant had filed a grievance against a member of the office. Defendant’s complaint with respect to the attorney who appeared with defendant at the plea was clearly expressed to the court. The court determined that defendant could not afford to retain counsel and did not wish to represent himself, and thus the court properly exercised its discretion in denying the mo[*846] tion of the Public Defender’s office to be relieved as defendant’s counsel (cf., People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822, 824-825). The contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at the plea because of advice he received from his attorney is based on information outside the record before us and is therefore properly raised by a CPL article 440 motion. The record, however, does not support the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at sentencing (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147). Finally, defendant has completed serving his sentence, and thus his contention that the sentence is unduly harsh dr severe is moot (see, People v Dukes, 256 AD2d 1181, lv denied 93 NY2d 872). (Appeal from Judgment of Livingston County Court, Cicoria, J. — Felony Driving While Intoxicated.) Present — Wisner, J. P., Hurlbutt, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.