From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Standley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 28, 2000
269 A.D.2d 614 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Submitted January 18, 2000

February 28, 2000

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Lefkowitz, J.), rendered November 7, 1997, convicting him of rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree, kidnapping in the second degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, criminal use of a firearm in the first degree, and criminal contempt in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Andrew S. Worgan, Kings Park, N.Y., for appellant.

James M. Catterson, Jr., District Attorney, Riverhead, N Y (Michael G. Gajdos of counsel), for respondent.

WILLIAM C. THOMPSON, J.P., THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's waiver of his right to appeal does not preclude him from challenging the voluntariness of his plea (see, People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1 ). Nonetheless, we find that the plea was entered into knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily (see,People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9 ). The defendant's claim that he was denied effective assistance of counsel is without merit (see,People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397 ).

By pleading guilty, the defendant waived his claim that he was denied his right to testify before the Grand Jury (see, People v. Franklin, 232 A.D.2d 577 ; People v. Ferrara, 99 A.D.2d 257 ).


Summaries of

People v. Standley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 28, 2000
269 A.D.2d 614 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

People v. Standley

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. DOUGLAS STANDLEY, appellant. (Ind. No…

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

Date published: Feb 28, 2000

Citations

269 A.D.2d 614 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
704 N.Y.S.2d 825

Citing Cases

People v. Ross

luntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal, since there is no indication that the defendant…

People v. Powell

However, that contention is unpreserved for appellate review because the defendant never moved to withdraw…