From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Depta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 28, 1999
257 A.D.2d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

January 28, 1999.

Appeal from the County Court of Franklin County (Main, Jr., J.).


While an inmate at Franklin Correctional Facility in Franklin County, defendant was involved in a physical altercation with two correction officers and was subsequently indicted for the crimes of assault in the second degree and attempted assault in the second degree. Defendant ultimately pleaded guilty to the crime of assault in the second degree and agreed to waive his right to appeal all issues except those relating to sentencing. Sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement to a determinate prison sentence of three years, to be served consecutive to the term he was then serving, defendant appeals.

We affirm. Initially, defendant's challenge to the propriety of County Court's Sandoval ruling was waived upon the entry of his guilty plea ( see, People v. Kilmer, 228 A.D.2d 808). Moreover, although defendant's waiver of his right to appeal does not preclude our review of the effectiveness of his counsel or the voluntariness of his guilty plea and waiver ( see, People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1, 10), defendant's arguments in these respects are unpreserved for our review due to defendant's failure to either move to vacate the judgment of conviction or to withdraw his guilty plea ( see, People v. Epps, 244 A.D.2d 1012; People v. Chappelle, 250 A.D.2d 878, 879, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 894). In any event, were we to review the arguments, we would find that defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently pleaded guilty and waived his right to appeal and that he was not denied effective assistance of counsel ( see, People v. Conyers, 227 A.D.2d 793, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 982).

Finally, we do not find that the sentence imposed was harsh or excessive considering the seriousness of the crime and that defendant was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement to the most lenient sentence allowed by statute ( see, People v. Trouche, 224 A.D.2d 836, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 970).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Depta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 28, 1999
257 A.D.2d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Depta

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. SAM DEPTA, Appellant

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

Date published: Jan 28, 1999

Citations

257 A.D.2d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
682 N.Y.S.2d 648

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

In any event, because the questions County Court asked at the July 21, 1997 bail hearing were pertinent to a…

People v. Smith

On this appeal, defendant contends that he was denied the right to the effective assistance of counsel as…