People v. Carden, 2003-09352.

CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division
Citation810 N.Y.S.2d 365,2006 NY Slip Op 01815,27 A.D.3d 573
Docket Number2003-09352.
PartiesTHE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JASON CARDEN, Appellant.
Decision Date14 March 2006
27 A.D.3d 573
810 N.Y.S.2d 365
2006 NY Slip Op 01815
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,
v.
JASON CARDEN, Appellant.
2003-09352.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department.
March 14, 2006.

Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Zambelli, J.), rendered September 23, 2003, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court upon a finding that he violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.


Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention regarding the sufficiency of the allocution of his admission to a violation of probation is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636 [1983]; People v Padilla, 18 AD3d 578 [2005]; People v Shelby, 267 AD2d 482 [1999]; People v Tavares, 197 AD2d 552 [1993]). In any event, the record establishes that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily admitted that he violated a condition of his probation (see CPL 410.70; People v Padilla, supra; People v Melvin, 274 AD2d 435 [2000]; People v Shelby, supra; People v McShaw, 204 AD2d 741 [1994]; People v Hunter, 194 AD2d 628 [1993]; People v Lombardo, 108 AD2d 873 [1985]).

As part of his original plea agreement, the defendant effectively waived appellate review of his claim that the sentence imposed in the amended judgment was excessive (see People v

27 A.D.3d 574

Pitter, 272 AD2d 416 [2000]; People v Strunkey, 268 AD2d 492 [2000]; People v Knight, 219 AD2d 677 [1995]).

Adams, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein, Skelos and Dillon, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • People v. Sanders
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 11 Diciembre 2013
    ...N.Y.S.2d 143; People v. Rosas, 34 A.D.3d 605, 823 N.Y.S.2d 684; People v. Sherrill, 27 A.D.3d 588, 810 N.Y.S.2d 372; People v. Carden, 27 A.D.3d 573, 810 N.Y.S.2d 365; People v. Eaton, 14 A.D.3d 577, 789 N.Y.S.2d 194; People v. Williams, 13 A.D.3d 661, 786 N.Y.S.2d 357; People v. Mercer, 20......
  • People v. King, 2017–06076
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 20 Marzo 2019
    ...review (see People v. Beach, 118 A.D.3d 905, 987 N.Y.S.2d 451 ; People v. Rogers, 45 A.D.3d 786, 847 N.Y.S.2d 590 ; People v. Carden, 27 A.D.3d 573, 810 N.Y.S.2d 365 ). The exception to the preservation requirement is not applicable here because the factual recitation did not clearly cast d......
  • People v. Reyes
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 26 Septiembre 2012
    ...880;People v. Decker, 83 A.D.3d 731, 732, 919 N.Y.S.2d 880;People v. Rogers, 45 A.D.3d 786, 787, 847 N.Y.S.2d 590;People v. Carden, 27 A.D.3d 573, 810 N.Y.S.2d 365). Furthermore, the “rare case” exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here because the defendant's allocution......
  • People v. Beach,
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 18 Junio 2014
    ...sentence of probation is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v. Rogers, 45 A.D.3d 786, 787, 847 N.Y.S.2d 590;People v. Carden, 27 A.D.3d 573, 810 N.Y.S.2d 365). The exception to the preservation requirement is not applicable here, since the factual recitation did not clearly cast ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • People v. Sanders
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 11 Diciembre 2013
    ...N.Y.S.2d 143; People v. Rosas, 34 A.D.3d 605, 823 N.Y.S.2d 684; People v. Sherrill, 27 A.D.3d 588, 810 N.Y.S.2d 372; People v. Carden, 27 A.D.3d 573, 810 N.Y.S.2d 365; People v. Eaton, 14 A.D.3d 577, 789 N.Y.S.2d 194; People v. Williams, 13 A.D.3d 661, 786 N.Y.S.2d 357; People v. Mercer, 20......
  • People v. King, 2017–06076
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 20 Marzo 2019
    ...review (see People v. Beach, 118 A.D.3d 905, 987 N.Y.S.2d 451 ; People v. Rogers, 45 A.D.3d 786, 847 N.Y.S.2d 590 ; People v. Carden, 27 A.D.3d 573, 810 N.Y.S.2d 365 ). The exception to the preservation requirement is not applicable here because the factual recitation did not clearly cast d......
  • People v. Reyes
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 26 Septiembre 2012
    ...880;People v. Decker, 83 A.D.3d 731, 732, 919 N.Y.S.2d 880;People v. Rogers, 45 A.D.3d 786, 787, 847 N.Y.S.2d 590;People v. Carden, 27 A.D.3d 573, 810 N.Y.S.2d 365). Furthermore, the “rare case” exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here because the defendant's allocution......
  • People v. Beach,
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 18 Junio 2014
    ...sentence of probation is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v. Rogers, 45 A.D.3d 786, 787, 847 N.Y.S.2d 590;People v. Carden, 27 A.D.3d 573, 810 N.Y.S.2d 365). The exception to the preservation requirement is not applicable here, since the factual recitation did not clearly cast ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT