From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. O'Neil

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 28, 1985
111 A.D.2d 414 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

May 28, 1985

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


Judgment affirmed.

The defendant did not assert his objections to the adequacy of the plea allocution in the court of first instance and therefore failed, as a matter of law, to preserve his claim for appellate review ( see, People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636; People v Adams, 46 N.Y.2d 1047; People v. Santiago, 100 A.D.2d 857). In any event, the court properly accepted defendant's guilty plea to burglary in the third degree, as the record discloses that his decision to plead guilty was the result of an informed and voluntary decision ( People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9).

Furthermore, defendant's contention that the sentence was unduly harsh and excessive is without merit. The sentence he received was well within both the statutory and discretionary limits for the offense committed. Since he received the sentence which he bargained for in entering the plea, defendant cannot now be heard to complain ( People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment appealed from. Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Bracken and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. O'Neil

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 28, 1985
111 A.D.2d 414 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

People v. O'Neil

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FREDERICK O'NEIL…

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

Date published: May 28, 1985

Citations

111 A.D.2d 414 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

People v. Sharcoff

In any event, a review of the record indicates that these arguments are without merit. We have reviewed the…