People v. Passley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Passley

109 A.D.2d 897, 486 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47425

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 109 A.D.2d 897 (People v. Passley) 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. Passley, 109 A.D.2d 897, 486 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47425 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by defendant from a [898]*898judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Owens, J.), rendered December 15, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant contends that Criminal Term erred in accepting his plea of guilty because it failed to apprise him of his right to testify in his own behalf. The defendant did not raise this objection in the court of first instance and thus has failed, as a matter of law, to preserve his claim for appellate review (People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636). In any event, the record discloses that defendant’s plea was both knowing and voluntary. The Trial Judge is not required to elicit a detailed set of specific waivers prior to accepting a plea of guilty from a defendant (People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 16).

Defendant’s contention that the sentence imposed is unduly harsh is without merit (People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816, 817). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal by defendant from a [898]*898judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Owens, J.), rendered December 15, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant contends that Criminal Term erred in accepting his plea of guilty because it failed to apprise him of his right to testify in his own behalf. The defendant did not raise this objection in the court of first instance and thus has failed, as a matter of law, to preserve his claim for appellate review (People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636). In any event, the record discloses that defendant’s plea was both knowing and voluntary. The Trial Judge is not required to elicit a detailed set of specific waivers prior to accepting a plea of guilty from a defendant (People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 16).

Defendant’s contention that the sentence imposed is unduly harsh is without merit (People v Kazepis, 101 AD2d 816, 817). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 A.D.2d 897, 486 N.Y.S.2d 789, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-passley-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack