People v Diaz
Annotate this Case
People v Diaz
2013 NY Slip Op 08735
Released on December 27, 2013
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.
Released on December 27, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.
1270 KA 11-00174
[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
v
CHRISTOPHER M. DIAZ, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Appeal, by permission of a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, from an order of the Monroe County Court (Patricia D. Marks, J.), dated January 6, 2011. The order denied the motion of defendant to vacate a judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10.
CHRISTOPHER M. DIAZ, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT PRO SE.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (AMANDA L. DREHER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed for reasons stated in the decision at County Court.
Entered: December 27, 2013
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
Released on December 27, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.
1270 KA 11-00174
[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
v
CHRISTOPHER M. DIAZ, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Appeal, by permission of a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, from an order of the Monroe County Court (Patricia D. Marks, J.), dated January 6, 2011. The order denied the motion of defendant to vacate a judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10.
CHRISTOPHER M. DIAZ, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT PRO SE.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (AMANDA L. DREHER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed for reasons stated in the decision at County Court.
Entered: December 27, 2013
Frances E. Cafarell
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.
