1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.Y.3d
  4. 19 N.Y.3d
  5. 19 N.Y.3d 842 (2012)
 

PEOPLE v. GILLIAM

Nos. 137 SSM 6, 138 SSM 7, 139 SSM 9, 140 SSM 15.

19 N.Y.3d 842 (2012)

946 N.Y.S.2d 98

2012 NY Slip Op 3576

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TYRAY GILLIAM, Appellant. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ALBERTO DE LUNA, Appellant. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. QUINTRELL JOE, Appellant. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DARNELL NORTON, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Decided May 8, 2012.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Hiscock Legal Aid Society, Syracuse ( Philip Rothschild of counsel), for appellant in the first above-entitled action.

William J. Fitzpatrick , District Attorney, Syracuse ( James P. Maxwell of counsel), for respondent in the first above-entitled action.

Center for Appellate Litigation, New York City ( Lisa A. Packard and Robert S. Dean of counsel), for appellant in the second above-entitled action.

Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. , District Attorney, New York City ( Nicole A. Coviello of counsel), for respondent in the second above-entitled action.

Hiscock Legal Aid Society, Syracuse ( Christine M. Cook of counsel), for appellant in the third above-entitled action.

William J. Fitzpatrick , District Attorney, Syracuse ( Victoria M. White and James P. Maxwell of counsel), for respondent in the third above-entitled action.

Timothy P. Donaher , Public Defender, Rochester ( Kimberly F. Duguay of counsel), for appellant in the fourth above-entitled action.

Sandra Doorley , District Attorney, Rochester ( Leslie E. Swift of counsel), for respondent in the fourth above-entitled action.

Chief Judge LIPPMAN and Judges CIPARICK, GRAFFEO, READ, SMITH, PIGOTT and JONES concur.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MEMORANDUM.

In each case, the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the matter remitted to that Court for further proceedings in accordance with this memorandum.

In these unrelated cases, defendants pleaded guilty to a particular crime and waived the right to appeal. Each defendant subsequently challenged the validity of the waiver and asserted that the sentence was excessive. The Appellate Division summarily...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases