People v. Rafael

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rafael

243 A.D.2d 277, 663 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9366

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

DecidedOctober 7, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 243 A.D.2d 277 (People v. Rafael) 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. Rafael, 243 A.D.2d 277, 663 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9366 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alfred Donati, J.), rendered May 25, 1995, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 4 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea was properly denied. The allocution minutes demonstrate that defendant’s plea was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, and that he understood the crime to which he was pleading guilty. Since defendant’s motion to withdraw the plea was made on different grounds from those advanced on appeal, defendant has not preserved his present claim that his factual recitations negated an element of the crime, and we see no reason to invoke the limited exception to the preservation requirement set forth in People v Lopez (71 NY2d 662). Defendant’s factual recitations, read as a whole and in context of the case (see, People v McGowen, 42 NY2d 905), do not cast significant doubt on his guilt (see, People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725, 726). Moreover, reduction of defendant’s conviction to a lesser included offense, which is the only relief requested on appeal, would not be a lawful remedy (People v Vaughn, 119 AD2d 779, lv denied 68 NY2d 760). Defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rubin, Tom, Andrias and Colabella, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alfred Donati, J.), rendered May 25, 1995, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 4 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea was properly denied. The allocution minutes demonstrate that defendant’s plea was entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, and that he understood the crime to which he was pleading guilty. Since defendant’s motion to withdraw the plea was made on different grounds from those advanced on appeal, defendant has not preserved his present claim that his factual recitations negated an element of the crime, and we see no reason to invoke the limited exception to the preservation requirement set forth in People v Lopez (71 NY2d 662). Defendant’s factual recitations, read as a whole and in context of the case (see, People v McGowen, 42 NY2d 905), do not cast significant doubt on his guilt (see, People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725, 726). Moreover, reduction of defendant’s conviction to a lesser included offense, which is the only relief requested on appeal, would not be a lawful remedy (People v Vaughn, 119 AD2d 779, lv denied 68 NY2d 760). Defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rubin, Tom, Andrias and Colabella, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D.2d 277, 663 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rafael-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack