From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Burvick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 3, 2009
60 A.D.3d 689 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 2006-08588.

March 3, 2009.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Donnino, J.), rendered June 29, 2006, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

A. James Bell, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.

Kathleen M. Rice, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Margaret E. Mainusch and Laurie K. Gibbons of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Skelos, J.P., Ritter, Florio and Miller, JJ.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's waiver of his right to appeal, in connection with his plea agreement, was intelligently, knowingly, and voluntarily made (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256-257). The defendant's valid and comprehensive waiver of his right to appeal forecloses appellate review of the denial of that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence ( see People v Kemp, 94 NY2d 831; People v Morales, 53 AD3d 630; People v Cardona, 51 AD3d 941). Moreover, the defendant's valid and unrestricted waiver of the right to appeal precludes appellate review of his claim that the sentence imposed was excessive (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256-257; People v Taubenkraut, 48 AD3d 598).


Summaries of

People v. Burvick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 3, 2009
60 A.D.3d 689 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

People v. Burvick

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROY BURVICK, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 3, 2009

Citations

60 A.D.3d 689 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 1659
874 N.Y.S.2d 808

Citing Cases

People v. Fontanet

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court's oral…

People v. Fontanet

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court's oral…