D., DAVID F., PEOPLE v

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

D., DAVID F., PEOPLE v

111 A.D.3d 1360, 974 N.Y.S.2d 838

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 8, 2013

DocketKA 12-01269

StatusPublished

This text of 111 A.D.3d 1360 (D., DAVID F., PEOPLE v) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

D., DAVID F., PEOPLE v, 111 A.D.3d 1360, 974 N.Y.S.2d 838 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from an adjudication of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered June 5, 2012. The adjudication, entered upon his plea of guilty of a violation of probation, sentenced defendant to a term of intermittent incarceration and continued his term of probation.

It is hereby ordered that the adjudication so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an adjudication, entered upon his plea of guilty of a violation of probation, sentencing him to a term of intermittent incarceration and continuing his term of probation. Defendant’s contention that his plea was not knowingly, intelligently, or voluntarily entered is not preserved for our review because he failed to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the adjudication on that ground (see People v Atkinson, 105 AD3d 1349, 1350 [2013]; People v Williams, 91 AD3d 1299, 1299 [2012]; see also People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988]). This case does not fall within the rare exception to the preservation requirement because the plea colloquy did not “clearly cast[ ] significant doubt upon the defendant’s guilt or otherwise call[ ] into question the voluntariness of the plea” (Lopez, 71 NY2d at 666). In any event, we conclude that defendant’s contention lacks merit. Present— Scudder, EJ., Fahey, Peradotto, Lindley and Valentino, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— Appeal from an adjudication of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered June 5, 2012. The adjudication, entered upon his plea of guilty of a violation of probation, sentenced defendant to a term of intermittent incarceration and continued his term of probation.

It is hereby ordered that the adjudication so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an adjudication, entered upon his plea of guilty of a violation of probation, sentencing him to a term of intermittent incarceration and continuing his term of probation. Defendant’s contention that his plea was not knowingly, intelligently, or voluntarily entered is not preserved for our review because he failed to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the adjudication on that ground (see People v Atkinson, 105 AD3d 1349, 1350 [2013]; People v Williams, 91 AD3d 1299, 1299 [2012]; see also People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988]). This case does not fall within the rare exception to the preservation requirement because the plea colloquy did not “clearly cast[ ] significant doubt upon the defendant’s guilt or otherwise call[ ] into question the voluntariness of the plea” (Lopez, 71 NY2d at 666). In any event, we conclude that defendant’s contention lacks merit. Present— Scudder, EJ., Fahey, Peradotto, Lindley and Valentino, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.3d 1360, 974 N.Y.S.2d 838, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/d-david-f-people-v-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack