From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Penna

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 11, 1994
203 A.D.2d 392 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

April 11, 1994

Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Cacciabaudo, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

It is well-settled that a plea of guilty forfeits the right to appellate review of the denial of a motion to dismiss the indictment for violation of the statutory right to a speedy trial (People v O'Brien, 56 N.Y.2d 1009; People v Friscia, 51 N.Y.2d 845; People v Velez, 179 A.D.2d 834; People v Wade, 139 A.D.2d 610; People v Jackson, 178 A.D.2d 305). Therefore, regardless of whether the defendant consented to his attorney's waiver of the statutory time period, his subsequent plea of guilty operated to waive any claim he may have had to seek dismissal of the action based upon the People's alleged violation of CPL 30.30.

The defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial was not violated since he failed to demonstrate that his defense was in any way impaired by reason of the delay (see, Barker v Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 530; People v Lawrence, 64 N.Y.2d 200; People v Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442; People v Calamese, 150 A.D.2d 474).

We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Penna

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 11, 1994
203 A.D.2d 392 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Penna

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. PHILLIP PENNA…

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

Date published: Apr 11, 1994

Citations

203 A.D.2d 392 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
612 N.Y.S.2d 905

Citing Cases

State v. Holland

The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal forecloses appellate review of his challenge to the…

People v. Winslow

Inasmuch as the defendant's moving papers, on their face, did not show the existence of an unexcused delay…