People v. Ali

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ali

286 A.D.2d 204, 728 N.Y.S.2d 662, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7742

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

DecidedAugust 2, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 286 A.D.2d 204 (People v. Ali) 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

People v. Ali, 286 A.D.2d 204, 728 N.Y.S.2d 662, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7742 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

On remittitur from the Court of Appeals, judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Rothwax, J.), rendered January 22, 1997, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the first degree, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of from 5 to 10 years imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

The Court of Appeals has held that because defendant failed to move to withdraw his guilty plea pursuant to CPL 220.60 (3), his claim that his guilty plea should be vacated has not been preserved as a question of law for review (People v Ali, 96 NY2d 840). We now decline to review such claim in the interest of justice.

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

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

On remittitur from the Court of Appeals, judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Rothwax, J.), rendered January 22, 1997, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the first degree, and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of from 5 to 10 years imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

The Court of Appeals has held that because defendant failed to move to withdraw his guilty plea pursuant to CPL 220.60 (3), his claim that his guilty plea should be vacated has not been preserved as a question of law for review (People v Ali, 96 NY2d 840). We now decline to review such claim in the interest of justice.

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 A.D.2d 204, 728 N.Y.S.2d 662, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ali-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack