Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ivan MARTINEZ, Also Known as Zok, Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Sullivan County (LaBuda, J.), rendered June 24, 2004, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.
In satisfaction of a two-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. County Court subsequently sentenced him in accordance with the negotiated plea agreement to a prison term of 6 to 12 years. Defendant then appealed and this Court rejected an Anders brief and assigned new counsel (31 A.D.3d 817, 816 N.Y.S.2d 919 [2006] ). We now affirm.
Defendant asserts that County Court coerced him into pleading guilty and, therefore, his plea must be set aside as invalid. Such an assertion, however, is unpreserved for our review given defendant's failure to move for withdrawal of his plea or vacatur of the judgment of conviction (see People v. Perez, 35 A.D.3d 1030, 1031, 826 N.Y.S.2d 488 [2006] ). In any event, a review of the plea proceedings satisfies us that defendant's guilty plea was not the subject of coercion and that he entered it voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently (see People v. Keebler, 15 A.D.3d 724, 726, 789 N.Y.S.2d 547 [2005], lv. denied 4 N.Y.3d 854, 797 N.Y.S.2d 428, 830 N.E.2d 327 [2005] ).
Defendant also contends that his sentence was harsh and excessive. Inasmuch as the record reveals that defendant did not validly waive his right to appeal (see People v. Lopez, 6 N.Y.3d 248, 255-256, 811 N.Y.S.2d 623, 844 N.E.2d 1145 [2006] ), we have considered this issue on the merits, yet discern neither an abuse of discretion by County Court nor any extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction of the lawful, agreed-upon sentence in the interest of justice (see People v. Marshall, 25 A.D.3d 876, 877, 807 N.Y.S.2d 691 [2006], lv. denied 6 N.Y.3d 850, 816 N.Y.S.2d 756, 849 N.E.2d 979 [2006] ).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
LAHTINEN, J.
MERCURE, J.P., CREW III, PETERS and ROSE, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 24, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)