People v. Miranda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Miranda

287 A.D.2d 275, 730 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9321

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

DecidedOctober 9, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 287 A.D.2d 275 (People v. Miranda) 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. Miranda, 287 A.D.2d 275, 730 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9321 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.), rendered January 19, 1999, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of six months concurrent with five years probation, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s argument that the court erred in accepting his guilty plea, in that the court’s inquiry into whether his plea was knowing and voluntary was inadequate to address his prior assertion that he had acted in self-defense, is unpreserved since defendant never moved to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment (see, People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court’s inquiry into defendant’s claim of self-defense sufficiently negated any valid justification defense. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.), rendered January 19, 1999, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of six months concurrent with five years probation, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s argument that the court erred in accepting his guilty plea, in that the court’s inquiry into whether his plea was knowing and voluntary was inadequate to address his prior assertion that he had acted in self-defense, is unpreserved since defendant never moved to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment (see, People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court’s inquiry into defendant’s claim of self-defense sufficiently negated any valid justification defense. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 A.D.2d 275, 730 N.Y.S.2d 856, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-miranda-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack