From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Banks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 24, 1997
244 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

November 24, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Quinones, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendants' pro se contention that the Supreme Court intimidated him into refraining from moving to withdraw his plea of guilty is premised upon matters dehors the record and thus cannot be resolved on a direct appeal from the judgment ( see, People v. Otero, 201 A.D.2d 675).

The defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would receive the sentence which was thereafter actually imposed. Under the circumstances of this case, the defendant has no basis now to complain that the sentence was excessive ( see, People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816).

Mangano, P. J., Copertino, Joy, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Banks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 24, 1997
244 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Banks

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. STEVEN BANKS, Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 24, 1997

Citations

244 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
664 N.Y.S.2d 816

Citing Cases

People v. Johnson

The defendant's contention that he was improperly sentenced because he suffers from mental illness is based…

People v. Drake

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contention that his waiver of the right to appeal was…