People v. Allrod

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Allrod

122 A.D.2d 271, 505 N.Y.S.2d 182, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59613

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

DecidedJuly 28, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 122 A.D.2d 271 (People v. Allrod) 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. Allrod, 122 A.D.2d 271, 505 N.Y.S.2d 182, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59613 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.), rendered May 24, 1982, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to his plea has not been preserved for appellate review. He failed to move to withdraw his plea (CPL 220.60 [3]) or to vacate the judgment pursuant to CPL 440.10 in the court of first instance (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636). In any event, the record reveals that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived his rights and pleaded guilty (see, People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9). Nor is the defendant’s challenge to the factual basis for his plea meritorious (see, People v Pelchat, 62 NY2d 97, 108; People v Clairborne, 29 NY2d 950, 951). Lastly, we note that the defendant received the sentence promised by the court at the time of the plea allocution. Thus, he has no basis to complain that his sentence is excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Niehoff, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.), rendered May 24, 1982, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The defendant’s challenge to his plea has not been preserved for appellate review. He failed to move to withdraw his plea (CPL 220.60 [3]) or to vacate the judgment pursuant to CPL 440.10 in the court of first instance (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636). In any event, the record reveals that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived his rights and pleaded guilty (see, People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9). Nor is the defendant’s challenge to the factual basis for his plea meritorious (see, People v Pelchat, 62 NY2d 97, 108; People v Clairborne, 29 NY2d 950, 951). Lastly, we note that the defendant received the sentence promised by the court at the time of the plea allocution. Thus, he has no basis to complain that his sentence is excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Niehoff, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 A.D.2d 271, 505 N.Y.S.2d 182, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 59613, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-allrod-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack