From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hines

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 28, 2001
286 A.D.2d 987 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

(1180) KA 00-01993.

September 28, 2001.

(Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Brunetti, J. — Robbery, 2nd Degree.)

PRESENT: WISNER, J.P., HURLBUTT, SCUDDER, KEHOE AND BURNS, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum:

Contrary to the contention of defendant, Supreme Court clearly and unambiguously warned him on February 4, 2000 that, if he failed to appear for sentencing on March 9, 2000, it would not be bound by its sentence promise and would impose an enhanced sentence of up to 15 years in prison. Defendant agreed to that condition and thereafter failed to appear for sentencing. Contrary to the further contention of defendant, the condition was not invalid because it was imposed after he entered his plea of guilty ( see, People v. Ramsey, 269 A.D.2d 616, 617, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 951; People v. Diaz, 264 A.D.2d 879, 879-880, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 879; People v. Briggs, 184 A.D.2d 1014). We further conclude that defendant received meaningful representation ( see generally, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147).


Summaries of

People v. Hines

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 28, 2001
286 A.D.2d 987 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Hines

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. DASHON M. HINES…

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

Date published: Sep 28, 2001

Citations

286 A.D.2d 987 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
730 N.Y.S.2d 910

Citing Cases

People v. Moore

Defendant agreed to that condition and thereafter failed to appear for sentencing. We reject the contention…

People v. Flanders

We affirm. As defendant was clearly warned that County Court would not be bound by the promised sentence in…