PEOPLE v. WILLIAMS (1999)

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

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Robert WILLIAMS, appellant.

Decided: February 08, 1999

GUY JAMES MANGANO, P.J., LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, THOMAS R. SULLIVAN and LEO F. McGINITY, JJ.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y., for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Thomas M. Ross of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lebowitz, J.), imposed September 23, 1997.

ORDERED that the sentence is affirmed.

The record indicates the defendant was incorrectly informed that he was not entitled to appellate review of his sentence on the ground that it was excessive, and therefore the purported waiver of his right to appeal that issue cannot be considered knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see, People v. Rose, 236 A.D.2d 637, 654 N.Y.S.2d 693). Accordingly, we have considered the defendant's contention that the sentence was excessive, but find it to be without merit (see, People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816, 475 N.Y.S.2d 351).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network