People v. Goodwill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Goodwill

20 A.D.3d 931, 797 N.Y.S.2d 345, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7385

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

DecidedJuly 1, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 20 A.D.3d 931 (People v. Goodwill) 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. Goodwill, 20 A.D.3d 931, 797 N.Y.S.2d 345, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7385 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Cattaraugus County Court (Larry M. Himelein, J.), rendered July 7, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted rape in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law, the plea is vacated, and the matter is remitted to Cattaraugus County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted rape in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.35 [4]). Defendant contends that he should be permitted to withdraw his guilty [932]*932plea because, prior to sentencing, he was not advised of the mandatory period of postrelease supervision that would be imposed as part of his sentence. We conclude that County Court’s failure to advise defendant of the mandatory period of postrelease supervision, which is “a direct consequence of his conviction,” requires reversal (People v Catu, 4 NY3d 242, 244 [2005]). Thus, we reverse the judgment of conviction, vacate the plea, and remit the matter to County Court for further proceedings consistent with our decision herein. Present—Kehoe, J.P., Gorski, Martoche, Smith and Pine, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Cattaraugus County Court (Larry M. Himelein, J.), rendered July 7, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted rape in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law, the plea is vacated, and the matter is remitted to Cattaraugus County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted rape in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.35 [4]). Defendant contends that he should be permitted to withdraw his guilty [932]*932plea because, prior to sentencing, he was not advised of the mandatory period of postrelease supervision that would be imposed as part of his sentence. We conclude that County Court’s failure to advise defendant of the mandatory period of postrelease supervision, which is “a direct consequence of his conviction,” requires reversal (People v Catu, 4 NY3d 242, 244 [2005]). Thus, we reverse the judgment of conviction, vacate the plea, and remit the matter to County Court for further proceedings consistent with our decision herein. Present—Kehoe, J.P., Gorski, Martoche, Smith and Pine, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.3d 931, 797 N.Y.S.2d 345, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-goodwill-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack