People v. McKee

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McKee

117 A.D.2d 681, 498 N.Y.S.2d 419, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52957

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

DecidedFebruary 10, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 117 A.D.2d 681 (People v. McKee) 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. McKee, 117 A.D.2d 681, 498 N.Y.S.2d 419, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52957 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeals by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (McNab, J.), both rendered August 10, 1983, convicting him of assault in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, under indictment No. 908/82, and assault in the second degree under indictment No. 1147/82, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeals bring up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of defendant’s pretrial motion which sought the suppression of his statement.

Judgments affirmed.

Defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his objections to his guilty pleas (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636; People v Braxton, 114 AD2d 855). In any event, his plea allocutions satisfied the standard established in People v Harris (61 NY2d 9) and sufficiently established the elements of the crimes to which he pleaded guilty (see, People v Braxton, supra; People v Mattocks, 100 AD2d 944). Although defendant was initially reluctant to admit certain criminal conduct, the record establishes that he thereafter made satisfactory factual allocutions, which were voluntary and made upon consultation with counsel.

Finally, the record of the Huntley hearing fully supports Criminal Term’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress his statement, which was clearly spontaneous (see, People v Porter, 110 AD2d 662). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeals by defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (McNab, J.), both rendered August 10, 1983, convicting him of assault in the first degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, under indictment No. 908/82, and assault in the second degree under indictment No. 1147/82, upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences. The appeals bring up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of defendant’s pretrial motion which sought the suppression of his statement.

Judgments affirmed.

Defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his objections to his guilty pleas (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636; People v Braxton, 114 AD2d 855). In any event, his plea allocutions satisfied the standard established in People v Harris (61 NY2d 9) and sufficiently established the elements of the crimes to which he pleaded guilty (see, People v Braxton, supra; People v Mattocks, 100 AD2d 944). Although defendant was initially reluctant to admit certain criminal conduct, the record establishes that he thereafter made satisfactory factual allocutions, which were voluntary and made upon consultation with counsel.

Finally, the record of the Huntley hearing fully supports Criminal Term’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress his statement, which was clearly spontaneous (see, People v Porter, 110 AD2d 662). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 A.D.2d 681, 498 N.Y.S.2d 419, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52957, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mckee-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack