People v. Mayo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Mayo

222 A.D.2d 858, 635 N.Y.S.2d 716, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13005

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

DecidedDecember 14, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 222 A.D.2d 858 (People v. Mayo) 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. Mayo, 222 A.D.2d 858, 635 N.Y.S.2d 716, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13005 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Yesawich Jr., J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.), rendered October 24, 1994, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

During the allocution of his guilty plea and in response to a broad multiple-part question by County Court, defendant stated, "I don’t know. I mean I didn’t really sell no drugs, no.” The court thereupon immediately questioned defendant as to the specific details of the alleged crime and defendant acknowledged each essential element thereof. Defendant now challenges the sufficiency of his plea allocution. Initially, we note that defendant did not move to withdraw his plea or vacate his judgment of conviction. Accordingly, this issue, raised for the first time on this appeal, was not preserved for appellate review (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665-666). Moreover, the record reveals that except for the one area of uncertainty, which was instantly addressed by County Court with further inquiry (see, supra, at 666), the plea was knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

Yesawich Jr., J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.), rendered October 24, 1994, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

During the allocution of his guilty plea and in response to a broad multiple-part question by County Court, defendant stated, "I don’t know. I mean I didn’t really sell no drugs, no.” The court thereupon immediately questioned defendant as to the specific details of the alleged crime and defendant acknowledged each essential element thereof. Defendant now challenges the sufficiency of his plea allocution. Initially, we note that defendant did not move to withdraw his plea or vacate his judgment of conviction. Accordingly, this issue, raised for the first time on this appeal, was not preserved for appellate review (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665-666). Moreover, the record reveals that except for the one area of uncertainty, which was instantly addressed by County Court with further inquiry (see, supra, at 666), the plea was knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D.2d 858, 635 N.Y.S.2d 716, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13005, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mayo-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack