From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ramirez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 8, 1994
210 A.D.2d 56 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

December 8, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic Massaro, J.).


Defendant's claim that the no-arrest condition on the basis of which the court enhanced the sentence was not a part of the plea bargain is not preserved for appellate review as a matter of law, defendant never having objected at sentencing or moved to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction (People v Ramirez, 196 A.D.2d 775, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 852). Were we to consider the issue in the interest of justice, we would find that the no-arrest condition, although pronounced after the court had accepted defendant's plea, was an explicit term of the plea agreement knowingly and voluntarily assented to by defendant (see, People v Outley, 80 N.Y.2d 702).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger and Asch, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Ramirez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 8, 1994
210 A.D.2d 56 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Ramirez

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JULIO RAMIREZ…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 8, 1994

Citations

210 A.D.2d 56 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
620 N.Y.S.2d 943

Citing Cases

People v. Wilson

The transcript of the August 2012 plea proceeding does not indicate that defendant was informed that if he…

People v. Wilson

The transcript of the August 2012 plea proceeding does not indicate that defendant was informed that if he…