From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. McKenzie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 13, 2008
51 A.D.3d 823 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 2006-02458.

May 13, 2008.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Putnam County (Rooney, J.), rendered November 22, 2005, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (three counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Gary E. Eisenberg, New City, N.Y., for appellant.

Adam B. Levy, District Attorney, Carmel, N.Y. (Christopher York of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Fisher, J.P., Florio, Angiolillo, Dickerson and Belen, JJ.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record shows that he entered a valid waiver of indictment, and freely and voluntarily consented to prosecution by superior court information ( see CPL 195.10, 195.20; People v Menchetti, 76 NY2d 473; People v Cohen, 47 AD3d 828). Further, having effectively waived his right to appeal, the defendant may not now obtain a reduction in his bargained-for sentence ( see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248).


Summaries of

People v. McKenzie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 13, 2008
51 A.D.3d 823 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

People v. McKenzie

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. PATRICK McKENZIE…

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

Date published: May 13, 2008

Citations

51 A.D.3d 823 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 4547
856 N.Y.S.2d 863

Citing Cases

People v. McKenzie

I understand that we are constrained by CPL 440.10(2)(c), which provides that a court must deny a motion to…

People v. McKenzie

I understand that we are constrained by CPL 440.10(2)(2), which provides that a court must deny a motion to…