AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. THOMAS PIEDISCALZO, appellant.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant has not preserved for appellate review his contention regarding the validity of his plea as he did not move to withdraw his plea of guilty or to vacate the judgment of conviction (see, People v. Gilchrist, 280 A.D.2d 488; People v. Naglieri, 262 A.D.2d 426), and we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

The defendant's contention that his sentence was excessive is without merit (see, People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816).

O'BRIEN, J.P., S. MILLER, McGINITY, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. PIEDISCALZO
(Oct 15, 2001)