People v Persaud

Annotate this Case
People v Persaud 2013 NY Slip Op 07211 Decided on November 7, 2013 Appellate Division, Third 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 and Entered: November 7, 2013
104387

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,

v

DHANASHAR PERSAUD, Also Known as TONY, Appellant.

Calendar Date: September 18, 2013
Before: Rose, J.P., McCarthy, Garry and Egan Jr., JJ.


M. Joe Landry, Schenectady, for appellant, and
appellant
pro se.
Robert M. Carney, District Attorney, Schenectady
(Gerald A. Dwyer of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Drago, J.), rendered April 8, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of murder in the second degree.

In satisfaction of two indictments charging him with numerous crimes, defendant pleaded guilty to murder in the second degree and waived his right to appeal the conviction and sentence. County Court imposed a sentence within the range contemplated by the plea agreement, namely, 18 years to life in prison. Defendant appeals.

Defense counsel asserts that no nonfrivolous issues exist to be raised upon this appeal and, accordingly, seeks to be relieved of his assignment. After reviewing the record, defense counsel's brief and a letter submitted by defendant, we agree. Inasmuch as "[d]efendant entered a knowing, intelligent and voluntary plea of guilty, waived his right to appeal, did not seek to vacate or withdraw his plea and was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement," the judgment is affirmed and counsel's request to withdraw is granted (People v Van Sein, 20 AD3d 815, 816 [2005]; see People v Cruwys, 113 AD2d 979, 980 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 650 [1986]; see generally People v Stokes, 95 NY2d 633 [2001]).

Rose, J.P., McCarthy, Garry and Egan Jr., JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.

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.