People v. Perdomo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Perdomo

305 A.D.2d 303, 759 N.Y.S.2d 322, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5912

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

DecidedMay 27, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 305 A.D.2d 303 (People v. Perdomo) 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. Perdomo, 305 A.D.2d 303, 759 N.Y.S.2d 322, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5912 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Peter Benitez, J., at plea; Barbara Newman, J., at sentence), rendered September 18, 2000, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of five years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s argument that his plea was not knowing and voluntary in that the court gave him insufficient information as to postrelease supervision is unpreserved (see People v Curry, 301 AD2d 658 [2003]; People v White, 296 AD2d 867 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 540 [2002]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the plea allocution adequately covered this subject. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Tom, Ellerin, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Peter Benitez, J., at plea; Barbara Newman, J., at sentence), rendered September 18, 2000, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of five years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s argument that his plea was not knowing and voluntary in that the court gave him insufficient information as to postrelease supervision is unpreserved (see People v Curry, 301 AD2d 658 [2003]; People v White, 296 AD2d 867 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 540 [2002]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the plea allocution adequately covered this subject. Concur — Buckley, P.J., Tom, Ellerin, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 303, 759 N.Y.S.2d 322, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5912, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-perdomo-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack