People v. Giddens

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Giddens

217 A.D.2d 590, 628 N.Y.S.2d 600

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

DecidedJuly 10, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 217 A.D.2d 590 (People v. Giddens) 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. Giddens, 217 A.D.2d 590, 628 N.Y.S.2d 600 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demarest, J.), rendered December 20, 1993, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant argues that his statements during the plea allocution raised the possibility of a justification defense which was not sufficiently explored by the court, and that his plea should therefore be vacated. The defendant’s argument lacks merit for several reasons. First, the record shows that the defendant waived the justification defense. Second, the defendant’s factual recitation did not negate an essential element of manslaughter in the first degree, the crime pleaded to. Moreover, the court’s further inquiry into the matter pursuant to People v Lopez (71 NY2d 662), though not required under the circumstances, reinforced that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered his plea. Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, 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 (Demarest, J.), rendered December 20, 1993, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant argues that his statements during the plea allocution raised the possibility of a justification defense which was not sufficiently explored by the court, and that his plea should therefore be vacated. The defendant’s argument lacks merit for several reasons. First, the record shows that the defendant waived the justification defense. Second, the defendant’s factual recitation did not negate an essential element of manslaughter in the first degree, the crime pleaded to. Moreover, the court’s further inquiry into the matter pursuant to People v Lopez (71 NY2d 662), though not required under the circumstances, reinforced that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered his plea. Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

217 A.D.2d 590, 628 N.Y.S.2d 600, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-giddens-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack