People v. Chuan Mu Fu, 2018–04374

CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division
Citation126 N.Y.S.3d 675 (Mem),186 A.D.3d 620
Docket NumberInd.No. 1053/16,2018–04374
Parties The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. CHUAN MU FU, Appellant.
Decision Date12 August 2020

186 A.D.3d 620
126 N.Y.S.3d 675 (Mem)

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent,
v.
CHUAN MU FU, Appellant.

2018–04374
Ind.No.
1053/16

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted - September 25, 2019
August 12, 2020


Paul Skip Laisure, New York, N.Y. (Tammy E. Linn of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Sarah G. Pitts of counsel; Katherine E. Giordano on the memorandum), for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., JOSEPH J. MALTESE, BETSY BARROS, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

186 A.D.3d 620

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (William Miller, J.), imposed February 7, 2017, upon his plea of guilty, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.

During plea bargaining, the People offered the defendant a sentence promise of 10 years' incarceration to be followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision in exchange for the defendant's plea of guilty to assault in the first degree, which was the top count in the indictment, and the defendant's execution of a waiver of the right to appeal. The defendant rejected the People's offer. The Supreme Court then offered to sentence the defendant to 7 years' incarceration to be followed by 5 years of

postrelease supervision in exchange for, inter alia, the defendant's plea of guilty to assault in the first degree and his execution of a waiver of the right to appeal. The defendant accepted the court's sentence promise and pleaded guilty to assault in the first degree. The defendant's plea of guilty and sentence were entered over the People's objection.

Since the People were not party to any plea bargain in which the defendant waived the right to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • People v. Guerrero, 110405
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • May 20, 2021
    ...of the appeal waiver process" by itself insisting upon the waiver of the right to appeal ( id. at 243 ; compare People v. Chuan Mu Fu, 186 A.D.3d 620, 621, 126 N.Y.S.3d 675 [2020], lv denied 36 N.Y.3d 1096, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, ––– N.E.3d –––– [Mar. 17, 2021] ). Additionally, "although the ap......
  • People v. Bussey, 2018–03747
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • August 12, 2020
    ...to confer with standby counsel did not violate his rights under the State or Federal Constitution and were a provident exercise of its 186 A.D.3d 620 discretion (see People v. Simmons , 155 A.D.3d 782, 783, 64 N.Y.S.3d 79 ; People v. Pettus , 22 A.D.3d 869, 870, 803 N.Y.S.2d 186 ). RIVERA, ......
  • U.S. Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Sartini, 2018–03027
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • August 12, 2020
    ...moved, inter alia, for summary judgment and an order of reference. The defendants opposed that motion. In an order dated August 25, 126 N.Y.S.3d 675 2016, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's motion.Thereafter, the plaintiff moved for a judgment of foreclosure and sale. The Supreme Cou......
3 cases
  • People v. Guerrero, 110405
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • May 20, 2021
    ...of the appeal waiver process" by itself insisting upon the waiver of the right to appeal ( id. at 243 ; compare People v. Chuan Mu Fu, 186 A.D.3d 620, 621, 126 N.Y.S.3d 675 [2020], lv denied 36 N.Y.3d 1096, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, ––– N.E.3d –––– [Mar. 17, 2021] ). Additionally, "although the ap......
  • People v. Bussey, 2018–03747
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • August 12, 2020
    ...to confer with standby counsel did not violate his rights under the State or Federal Constitution and were a provident exercise of its 186 A.D.3d 620 discretion (see People v. Simmons , 155 A.D.3d 782, 783, 64 N.Y.S.3d 79 ; People v. Pettus , 22 A.D.3d 869, 870, 803 N.Y.S.2d 186 ). RIVERA, ......
  • U.S. Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Sartini, 2018–03027
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • August 12, 2020
    ...moved, inter alia, for summary judgment and an order of reference. The defendants opposed that motion. In an order dated August 25, 126 N.Y.S.3d 675 2016, the Supreme Court granted the plaintiff's motion.Thereafter, the plaintiff moved for a judgment of foreclosure and sale. The Supreme Cou......

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