From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Seymour

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 19, 2001
282 A.D.2d 871 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Decided and Entered: April 19, 2001.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Clinton County (McGill, J.), rendered August 7, 1998, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of two counts of the crime of attempted assault in the first degree.

Catherine A. Barber, Schenectady, for appellant.

Penelope D. Clute, District Attorney, Plattsburgh, for respondent.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Peters, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER


Defendant was charged with multiple crimes following an incident in which he threatened his estranged wife and her friend with a large knife. In full satisfaction of the indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted assault in the first degree, waived his right to appeal and was sentenced as a second violent felony offender to two determinate prison terms of seven years, said terms to run concurrently. This appeal ensued.

Initially, our review of the record discloses that defendant entered a knowing, voluntary and intelligent guilty plea, including a waiver of the right to appeal, which precludes him from challenging the Grand Jury proceedings (see, People v. Robertson, 279 A.D.2d 711, 712, 718 N.Y.S.2d 463, 464; People v. Lynch, 256 A.D.2d 651, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 1004). Contrary to defendant's claim that he was denied effective assistance of counsel, we find that he was provided meaningful representation in the underlying proceedings (see, People v. Ponce, 276 A.D.2d 921, 922; People v. Brooks, 273 A.D.2d 513, 514, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 932).

We agree, however, that defendant's waiver did not encompass his right to appeal the severity of the sentence, inasmuch as he was not informed of the maximum sentence he could face if convicted after trial (see,People v. Shea, 254 A.D.2d 512, 513; see also, People v. Jones, 277 A.D.2d 1019, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 706 [Feb. 1, 2001]; People v. Mayham, 272 A.D.2d 951). Nevertheless, given that defendant agreed to the sentence as part of the plea bargain and considering his violent criminal history, we find no extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction (see, People v. Wood, 260 A.D.2d 726, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 982). Accordingly, we decline to disturb the judgment of conviction.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Seymour

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 19, 2001
282 A.D.2d 871 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

People v. Seymour

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. JAMES H. SEYMOUR…

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

Date published: Apr 19, 2001

Citations

282 A.D.2d 871 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
723 N.Y.S.2d 417

Citing Cases

People v. Jones

Memorandum: The record establishes that, as part of his negotiated guilty plea, defendant knowingly,…

People v. Grant

In any event, our review of the record discloses no abuse of discretion in the sentence imposed or any…