People v. Piparo
| Decision Date | 02 November 1987 |
| Citation | 134 A.D.2d 295,520 N.Y.S.2d 621 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. David PIPARO, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Joseph G. Goubeaud, Jr., Mount Vernon, for appellant.
David Piparo, pro se.
Carl A. Vergari, Dist. Atty., White Plains (Richard L. Hecht and Maryanne Luciano, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and MANGANO, SPATT and SULLIVAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Zittell, J.), rendered May 17, 1985, 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's sentence, three concurrent terms of imprisonment of nine to 18 years, was within the range of possible sentences promised by the court when the guilty plea was entered and was not excessive (see, People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816, 475 N.Y.S.2d 351; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).
Furthermore, the claims raised in the defendant's pro se supplemental brief rely on facts not contained in the record and, consequently, are not reviewable by this court (see, People v. Brown, 45 N.Y.2d 852, 410 N.Y.S.2d 287, 382 N.E.2d 1149). The defendant's assertion that this appeal is also from an order of the County Court denying his motion to vacate the judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10 is incorrect, because leave to appeal from the denial of such a motion was never sought or granted (see, CPL 450.15[1]; 460.15).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miranda v. Graham
...and was not at liberty to make any legal arguments based on facts not already contained in the record. See People v. Piparo, 520 N.Y.S.2d 621, 622 (App. Div. 1987) ("[T]he claims raised in [a] brief [that] rely on facts not contained in the record . . . are not reviewable by this court."); ......
-
People v. Davis
...motion. Although the order of the Trial Judge dated June 5, 1989, disposing of that motion is dehors the record (see, People v. Piparo, 134 A.D.2d 295, 520 N.Y.S.2d 621), we have taken judicial notice of these court documents (see, People ex rel. Glidden v. Nemier, 133 A.D.2d 487, 519 N.Y.S......
-
People v. Piermont
...N.E.2d 786; People v. Robinson, 159 A.D.2d 598, 552 N.Y.S.2d 457; People v. Colon, 138 A.D.2d 392, 525 N.Y.S.2d 675; People v. Piparo, 134 A.D.2d 295, 520 N.Y.S.2d 621). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find that it was legally sufficient to establish ......
-
People v. Santiago
...consequently, is not reviewable on this appeal (see, Matter of Lawyer v. Bradley, 212 A.D.2d 616, 623 N.Y.S.2d 138; People v. Piparo, 134 A.D.2d 295, 520 N.Y.S.2d 621). The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either unpreserved for......