People v. McDonald
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- People v. Anderson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- People v. Anderson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- People v. Quinones (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- People v. Gibson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
- People v. Schuh (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
- People v. Tower (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
- People v. Boyce (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- People v. Barrett (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- People v. Rhinehart (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Albany County (Breslin, J.), rendered October 17, 2000, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.
Defendant operated a motor vehicle in an intoxicated condition in Albany County and was charged in a superior court information (hereinafter SCI) with the crime of driving while intoxicated (hereinafter DWI) as a felony. The SCI was accompanied by a special information and two statements of prior conviction charging that defendant had twice been convicted of DWI in Warren County within the preceding 10 years. Defendant pleaded guilty as charged in the SCI, received a specific sentence commitment and waived his right to appeal. In accordance with the plea agreement, he was sentenced to a prison term of 1 to 3 years to run consecutive to a prison term of IV2 to 4V2 years imposed in connection with yet a third DWI conviction in Warren County. Defendant appeals.
In view of defendant’s explicit waiver of his right to appeal the agreed-upon sentence, we will not consider his contention that it is harsh and excessive (see, People v Allen, 82 NY2d 761, 762; People v Deemer, 261 AD2d 722). We have reviewed defendant’s remaining claim and found it to be unavailing.
Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Spain and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.