People v. Love
| Decision Date | 10 February 1997 |
| Citation | 654 N.Y.S.2d 149,236 A.D.2d 488 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Robert LOVE, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Michele Marone, Brooklyn, for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, (Roseann B. MacKechnie, Leonard Joblove, and Jonathan Inker, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MILLER, J.P., and SULLIVAN, PIZZUTO and GOLDSTEIN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pesce, J.), rendered January 13, 1994, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (three counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant may not challenge the denial of his first motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds to the extent that it raised alleged statutory violations. The defendant pleaded guilty and his plea constituted a forfeiture of his statutory speedy trial claims. Moreover, he expressly waived appellate review and his waiver clearly was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary (see, People v. Allen, 82 N.Y.2d 761, 603 N.Y.S.2d 820, 623 N.E.2d 1170). Therefore, the defendant's present challenges to the order denying his first motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds insofar as it asserted statutory speedy trial violations, are not properly before us for review (People v. Grandberry, 223 A.D.2d 723, 637 N.Y.S.2d 203; see, People v. Cooper, 226 A.D.2d 1115, 642 N.Y.S.2d 131).
To the extent the defendant argues that his constitutional speedy trial rights were violated, and that the court erred in denying his first motion on this basis, his claims are not procedurally barred since constitutional speedy trial claims survive both a plea of guilty and an otherwise efficacious waiver of appellate review (People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1, 9, 543 N.Y.S.2d 968, 541 N.E.2d 1022; People v. Cooper, supra; People v. Grandberry, supra). However, on the merits we find that the court did not err in denying this branch of the defendant's first motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds (see, People v. Murphy, 212 A.D.2d 811, 623 N.Y.S.2d 278; People v. Rossi, 210 A.D.2d 511, 620 N.Y.S.2d 465; People v. Foster, 205 A.D.2d 313, 612 N.Y.S.2d 414; People v. Morales, 199 A.D.2d 284, 605 N.Y.S.2d 944).
Nor is the defendant entitled to relief concerning his second motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds which was pending at the time he pleaded guilty. This motion primarily raised statutory claims which were both forfeited...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Gardner
...raise his constitutional claims on appeal (see People v. Taylor, 65 N.Y.2d 1, 5, 489 N.Y.S.2d 152, 478 N.E.2d 755 ; People v. Love, 236 A.D.2d 488, 489, 654 N.Y.S.2d 149 ), they are, nonetheless, without merit. An unjustified delay in prosecution deprives a defendant of the state constituti......
-
People v. Walsh
...People v. Allen, 82 N.Y.2d 761, 603 N.Y.S.2d 820, 623 N.E.2d 1170; People v. Torres, 236 A.D.2d 642, 654 N.Y.S.2d 658; People v. Love, 236 A.D.2d 488, 654 N.Y.S.2d 149; People v. Berry, 235 A.D.2d 485, 652 N.Y.S.2d 997). In light of the defendant's conclusory assertions of coercion and inno......
-
People v. Barker
...281-282, 590 N.Y.S.2d 46, 604 N.E.2d 108; People v. Rodriguez, 50 N.Y.2d 553, 557, 429 N.Y.S.2d 631, 407 N.E.2d 475; People v. Love, 236 A.D.2d 488, 489, 654 N.Y.S.2d 149, lv. denied 90 N.Y.2d 895, 662 N.Y.S.2d 438, 685 N.E.2d 219). In any event, upon balancing the relevant factors (see, Pe......
-
People v. Love
...662 N.Y.S.2d 438 90 N.Y.2d 895, 685 N.E.2d 219 People v. Robert Love Court of Appeals of New York July 16, 1997 Ciparick, J. --- A.D.2d ----, 654 N.Y.S.2d 149 App.Div. 2, Kings Denied. ...