People v. Pink

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pink

265 A.D.2d 191, 696 N.Y.S.2d 676, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10161

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

DecidedOctober 12, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 265 A.D.2d 191 (People v. Pink) 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. Pink, 265 A.D.2d 191, 696 N.Y.S.2d 676, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10161 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.), rendered January 10, 1997, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of two counts of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 17 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that the court improperly accepted his guilty plea is unpreserved for appellate review because he failed to move either to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction and this case does not fall within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665-666). Defendant’s utterances, viewed in their entirety, cast no significant doubt on either the voluntariness of his plea or on his guilt (see, People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725). When defendant equivocated on the issue of intent, the court made a sufficient inquiry and defendant’s responses establish that he understood the nature of the charge and knowingly pleaded guilty to it. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Williams, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.), rendered January 10, 1997, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of two counts of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 17 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that the court improperly accepted his guilty plea is unpreserved for appellate review because he failed to move either to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction and this case does not fall within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665-666). Defendant’s utterances, viewed in their entirety, cast no significant doubt on either the voluntariness of his plea or on his guilt (see, People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725). When defendant equivocated on the issue of intent, the court made a sufficient inquiry and defendant’s responses establish that he understood the nature of the charge and knowingly pleaded guilty to it. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Williams, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D.2d 191, 696 N.Y.S.2d 676, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pink-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack