People v Daniel O. Torres
Annotate this Case
People v Torres
2003 NY Slip Op 18642 [1 AD3d 1065]
Decided on November 21, 2003
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.
Decided on November 21, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., PINE, SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ.
1284 KA 03-01110
[*1]PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, ORDER
v
DANIEL O. TORRES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Appeal from a judgment of Monroe County Court (Maloy, J.), entered March 22, 2002, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts).
HOWARD K. BRODER, ROCHESTER, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
HOWARD R. RELIN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (WENDY EVANS LEHMANN OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Entered: November 21, 2003JoAnn M. Wahl
Clerk of the Court
Decided on November 21, 2003
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., PINE, SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ.
1284 KA 03-01110
[*1]PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, ORDER
v
DANIEL O. TORRES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Appeal from a judgment of Monroe County Court (Maloy, J.), entered March 22, 2002, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts).
HOWARD K. BRODER, ROCHESTER, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
HOWARD R. RELIN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (WENDY EVANS LEHMANN OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Entered: November 21, 2003JoAnn M. Wahl
Clerk of the Court
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
