People v. McCollough

135 A.D.3d 490, 22 N.Y.S.3d 444
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 12, 2016
Docket16617 1595/12
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 135 A.D.3d 490 (People v. McCollough) 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. McCollough, 135 A.D.3d 490, 22 N.Y.S.3d 444 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles H. Solomon, J.), rendered June 11, 2013, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of burglary in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 3V2 to 7 years as a parole supervision sentence, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant did not preserve his claim that his plea was involuntary (see People v Conceicao, 26 NY3d 375, 381 [2015]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Although defendant moved to withdraw his plea, it is clear that the relief he was seeking was the court’s adherence, notwithstanding defendant’s rearrest, to the original promise of a parole supervision sentence (see CPL 410.91), and that the court granted that relief to defendant’s satisfaction. As an alternative holding, we find that defendant’s plea was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, and that the court sufficiently explained the promised sentence.

Defendant’s claim that the integrity of the grand jury proceedings was impaired because grand jurors allegedly saw him in handcuffs is likewise unpreserved, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment did not assert this circumstance as a ground for dismissal, although the motion referred to the alleged handcuffing incident in a different context. As an alternative holding, we also reject it on the merits. Even at a trial, where the issue is guilt or innocence, a jury’s brief and inadvertent viewing of a defendant in handcuffs does not warrant reversal (People v Harper, 47 NY2d 857, 858 [1979]).

*491 We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Renwick, J.R, Andrias, Saxe and Moskowitz, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Artwell (Odeshia)
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019
People v. Turner
2018 NY Slip Op 20 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Harvey
137 A.D.3d 1162 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
135 A.D.3d 490, 22 N.Y.S.3d 444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mccollough-nyappdiv-2016.