People v. Zeigler
| Decision Date | 06 May 2015 |
| Docket Number | 2012-07628, 2012-09881 |
| Citation | 128 A.D.3d 737,7 N.Y.S.3d 600,2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 03874 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Andrew ZEIGLER, Jr., appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
128 A.D.3d 737
7 N.Y.S.3d 600
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 03874
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent
v.
Andrew ZEIGLER, Jr., appellant.
2012-07628, 2012-09881
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 6, 2015.
Mark Diamond, New York, N.Y., for appellant, and appellant pro se.
Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Ronnie Jane Lamm of counsel), for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, LEONARD B. AUSTIN, and HECTOR D. LaSALLE, JJ.
Opinion
Appeals by the defendant from (1) a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Cohen, J.), rendered July 17, 2012, and (2) an amended judgment of the same court, rendered September 25, 2012, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the appeal from the judgment is dismissed, as the judgment was superseded by the amended judgment; and it is further,
ORDERED that the amended judgment is affirmed.
The defendant entered a plea of guilty to robbery in the first degree and attempted robbery in the first degree. As part of the plea agreement, he waived his right to appeal. The defendant was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement. Subsequently, the County Court learned that the judgment imposed periods of postrelease
supervision that were not permissible under the law, and offered the defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea. The defendant declined the opportunity on the condition that he be permitted to amend his waiver of the right to appeal to allow him to appeal the issue of the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground that he was denied his right to testify before the grand jury. The County Court consented to the amendment, and an amended judgment imposing sentence and the proper periods...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Robinson
...v. Peale, 122 A.D.2d 353, 354, 504 N.Y.S.2d 321 ; People v. Miller, 38 A.D.2d 745, 746, 329 N.Y.S.2d 762 ; accord People v. Zeigler, 128 A.D.3d 737, 737, 7 N.Y.S.3d 600 ). Here, during the plea proceedings, the County Court indicated that it would impose periods of postrelease supervision t......
-
People v. Gordon
...days of his arraignment (see CPL 190.50[5][c] ; People v. Schultz, 128 A.D.3d 989, 990, 9 N.Y.S.3d 402 ; 132 A.D.3d 905People v. Zeigler, 128 A.D.3d 737, 738, 7 N.Y.S.3d 600 ; People v. Simon, 101 A.D.3d 908, 909, 954 N.Y.S.2d 899 ; People v. Venable, 7 A.D.3d 647, 648, 776 N.Y.S.2d 497 ). ......
-
People v. Gordon
...within five days of his arraignment ( seeCPL 190.50[5][c]; People v. Schultz, 128 A.D.3d 989, 990, 9 N.Y.S.3d 402; People v. Zeigler, 128 A.D.3d 737, 738, 7 N.Y.S.3d 600; People v. Simon, 101 A.D.3d 908, 909, 954 N.Y.S.2d 899; People v. Venable, 7 A.D.3d 647, 648, 776 N.Y.S.2d 497). Additio......
-
People v. Price
...raised in point I of his pro se supplemental brief, is precluded by his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Zeigler, 128 A.D.3d 737, 738, 7 N.Y.S.3d 600 ; People v. Kidd, 100 A.D.3d 779, 779, 953 N.Y.S.2d 863 ; People v. Holland, 44 A.D.3d 874, 874, 843 N.Y.S.2d 457 ). Moreov......