From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Webb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 2002
299 A.D.2d 955 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

KA 02-01028

November 15, 2002.

Appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County (Tills, J.), entered November 7, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of grand larceny in the fourth degree.

THOMAS THEOPHILOS, BUFFALO, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FRANK J. CLARK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (DONNA A. MILLING OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: PINE, J.P., HAYES, SCUDDER, KEHOE, AND LAWTON, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:

On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30), defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in imposing an enhanced sentence without affording him an opportunity to withdraw his plea. Even assuming, arguendo, that the statement of the court that it was "inclined" to sentence defendant to a period of probation constituted a commitment to such sentence, we conclude that defendant failed to preserve his contention for our review because he neither objected to the alleged enhanced sentence nor moved to withdraw his plea ( see People v. Michael S., 273 A.D.2d 804; People v. Luksch, 265 A.D.2d 895, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 825; People v. Perry, 252 A.D.2d 990, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 929). We decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see CPL 470.15 [a]; Luksch, 265 A.D.2d at 895-896). Contrary to the People's contention, the waiver by defendant of the right to appeal does not encompass his challenge to the severity of the sentence where, as here, the court had not advised him of the potential periods of incarceration that could be imposed before he waived his right to appeal ( see People v. Lococo, 92 N.Y.2d 825, 827; People v. Hidalgo, 91 N.Y.2d 733, 737). We conclude, however, that the sentence imposed is neither unduly harsh nor severe. We have examined defendant's remaining contention and conclude that it lacks merit.


Summaries of

People v. Webb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 2002
299 A.D.2d 955 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

People v. Webb

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. JEFFREY WEBB…

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

Date published: Nov 15, 2002

Citations

299 A.D.2d 955 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
750 N.Y.S.2d 420

Citing Cases

People v. Viele

Defendant also contends that, instead of imposing an “enhanced sentence,” the court should have afforded him…

People v. Turck

While defense counsel's representation may not have been error-free, the record as a whole establishes that…