People v. Cicatelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cicatelli

205 A.D.2d 696, 614 N.Y.S.2d 306

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

DecidedJune 20, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 205 A.D.2d 696 (People v. Cicatelli) 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. Cicatelli, 205 A.D.2d 696, 614 N.Y.S.2d 306 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), rendered November 2, 1988, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the court should not have accepted his plea because it was involuntary and did not inculpate him. However, review of the record demonstrates that the defendant’s plea of guilty was knowingly, voluntarily, [697]*697and intelligently entered; such a plea will not be vacated merely because the defendant is unwilling or unable to describe or admit to the underlying facts of the charged crime (see, North Carolina v Alford, 400 US 25; People v Thompson, 174 AD2d 702). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter, Friedmann and Krausman, 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, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), rendered November 2, 1988, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the court should not have accepted his plea because it was involuntary and did not inculpate him. However, review of the record demonstrates that the defendant’s plea of guilty was knowingly, voluntarily, [697]*697and intelligently entered; such a plea will not be vacated merely because the defendant is unwilling or unable to describe or admit to the underlying facts of the charged crime (see, North Carolina v Alford, 400 US 25; People v Thompson, 174 AD2d 702). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 696, 614 N.Y.S.2d 306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cicatelli-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack