People v. Herring

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Herring

224 A.D.2d 544, 638 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1183

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

DecidedFebruary 13, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 224 A.D.2d 544 (People v. Herring) 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. Herring, 224 A.D.2d 544, 638 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1183 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered January 23, 1995, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

[545]*545Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We reject the defendant’s contention that the County Court should have, sua sponte, conducted a competency hearing pursuant to CPL 730.30 prior to accepting the defendant’s plea. We have examined the record and find that there was no reason to believe that the defendant did not have the capacity to understand the proceedings against him and assist in his own defense (see, CPL 730.10 [1]), and further find that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered (see, People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, 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 County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered January 23, 1995, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

[545]*545Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We reject the defendant’s contention that the County Court should have, sua sponte, conducted a competency hearing pursuant to CPL 730.30 prior to accepting the defendant’s plea. We have examined the record and find that there was no reason to believe that the defendant did not have the capacity to understand the proceedings against him and assist in his own defense (see, CPL 730.10 [1]), and further find that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered (see, People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816). Balletta, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D.2d 544, 638 N.Y.S.2d 345, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-herring-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack