People v. Ball

174 A.D.2d 991, 572 N.Y.S.2d 151, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8903
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 7, 1991·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant’s plea was knowingly and voluntarily made. At the plea colloquy, although defendant first denied that he was present at the scene of the crime, he ultimately admitted facts constituting all of the essential elements of the crime of kidnapping in the first degree. He stated that he was at the scene of the crime, that he brought the gun to the scene and gave it to his accomplice, that he choked the victim for the purpose of preventing his discovery or escape, and that the victim was shot by his accomplice. Unlike the case of People v Serrano (15 NY2d 304), cited by defendant, here, defendant’s final recitation of the facts did not indicate that he might not be guilty of the crime charged.

We do not reach defendant’s second issue on appeal, whether his suppression motion was improperly denied, because the record shows that defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal on that issue (see, People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1). (Appeal from Judgment of Oneida County Court, Buckley, J.—Kidnapping, 1st Degree.) Present —Dillon, P. J., Boomer, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.

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

People v. Ball, 174 A.D.2d 991, 572 N.Y.S.2d 151, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

174 A.D.2d 991 (People v. Ball) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ball v. Senkowski
906 F. Supp. 99 (N.D. New York, 1995)