From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Immel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 5, 2001
288 A.D.2d 235 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Submitted October 17, 2001.

November 5, 2001.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Rosenwasser, J.), rendered May 17, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Gary E. Eisenberg, Monroe, N.Y., for appellant. Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (David R. Huey of counsel), for respondent.

Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, P.J., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, NANCY E. SMITH, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.


ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court breached the plea agreement by directing him to pay restitution is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v. Dubois, 252 A.D.2d 505; People v. Taylor, 245 A.D.2d 398; People v. Jackson, 227 A.D.2d 644). In any event, the contention is without merit.

BRACKEN, P.J., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO, SMITH and ADAMS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Immel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 5, 2001
288 A.D.2d 235 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Immel

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., RESPONDENT, v. CHRISTOPHER IMMEL, APPELLANT

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

Date published: Nov 5, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 235 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
732 N.Y.S.2d 359

Citing Cases

People v. Norman

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contentions are unpreserved for appellate review ( see…

People v. Maldonado

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed. The defendant's contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (…