green
Positive treatment
19.9 score
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Torres
Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention in his pro se supplemental brief concerning the presentence report ( see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Pedro , 134 AD3d 1396, 1397 [4th Dept 2015]), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Carbone
We do not consider the additional challenge to the voluntariness of the plea raised by defendant in her brief inasmuch as her appellate counsel withdrew that contention ( see People v Pedro , 134 AD3d 1396, 1397 [4th Dept 2015]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Collins
Finally, even assuming, arguendo, that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal in appeal No. 2 is invalid and thus does not preclude our review of his challenge to the severity of the sentence in that appeal ( see People v Pedro , 134 AD3d 1396, 1397 [4th Dept 2015]; People v Caufield , 126 AD3d 1542, 1542 [4th Dept 2015]), we nevertheless conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Dalton
Assuming, arguendo, that defendant preserved for our review his contention that the court erred in declining to order a new presentence investigation report or to strike certain information from that report ( cf. People v Richardson , 142 AD3d 1318 , 1319 [4th Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 1150 [2017]; People v Pedro , 134 AD3d 1396, 1397 [4th Dept 2015]; see also People v Jones , 114 AD3d 1239 , 1242 [4th Dept 2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1038 [2014], 25 NY3d 1166 [2015]), we perceive no reason to disturb the sentence on that ground where, as here, there is no "indication that the court relied up…
cited
Cited "see"
Wilson v. Jones
Id. at 2-3 (citing decision citations 134 A.D. 1396 and 27 N.Y.3d 1076 ); accord People v. Wilson, 134 A.D.3d 1396 (4th Dep't 2015), lv. denied, 27 N.Y.3d 1076 (2016).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Christopher A. Wilson
v.
Christopher A. Wilson
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 23, 2015.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Appeal from a judgment of the Jefferson County Court (Kim H. Martusewicz, J.), rendered May 10, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first 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 criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree (Penal Law § 220.21 [1]). We affirm for the reasons stated in People v Richardson (132 AD3d 1313 [2015]). Present — Scudder, P.J., Centra, Carni, Whalen and DeJoseph, JJ.