People v Michael Shane Hale

Annotate this Case
People v Hale 2006 NY Slip Op 05033 [30 AD3d 613] Decided on June 20, 2006 Appellate Division, Second 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 June 20, 2006
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
DAVID S. RITTER, J.P.
DANIEL F. LUCIANO
STEVEN W. FISHER
ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ.
1999-02050 DECISION & ORDER

[*1]The People, etc., respondent,

v

Michael Shane Hale, appellant. (Ind. No. 8776/96, S.C.I. No. 243/99)




Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Paul Skip Laisure of counsel),
for appellant, and appellant pro se.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard
Joblove and Jacqueline M. Linares of
counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered February 10, 1999, convicting him of murder in the second degree and kidnapping in the second degree under Indictment No. 8776/96, upon his plea of guilty, and robbery in the first degree under Superior Court Information No. 243/99, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The form signed by the defendant, which purported to constitute a waiver of his right to appeal, was insufficient to establish that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to appeal from his sentence on the ground of excessiveness (see People v Brown, 13 AD3d 548, 549; People v Rose, 236 AD2d 637; People v Rolon, 220 AD2d 543). Accordingly, we have considered the defendant's contention that the sentence was excessive but find it to be without merit (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief and amended supplemental pro se brief, are also without merit. [*2]
RITTER, J.P., LUCIANO, FISHER and LIFSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

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.