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. Charles Smith, appellant. (Ind. No. 96-00470)

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's plea of guilty resulted in the forfeiture of his right to appellate review of that branch of his omnibus motion which was to dismiss the indictment based upon an alleged violation of CPL 30.30 (see, People v. O'Brien, 56 N.Y.2d 1009 ;People v. Suarez, 55 N.Y.2d 940 ). Review of that issue is also precluded by the defendant's express waiver of his right to appeal which was part of his plea agreement (see, People v. Cabrera, 254 A.D.2d 366 ; People v. Grandberry, 223 A.D.2d 723 ).

Upon our review of the appropriate factors (see, People v. Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442 ), we find that the defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial was not compromised (see,People v. Robinson, 249 A.D.2d 333 ; People v. Allah, 202 A.D.2d 599 ).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. SMITH
(Apr 24, 2000)