People v. Reyes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Reyes

202 A.D.2d 190, 608 N.Y.S.2d 426, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1821

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

DecidedMarch 3, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 202 A.D.2d 190 (People v. Reyes) 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. Reyes, 202 A.D.2d 190, 608 N.Y.S.2d 426, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1821 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Felice K. Shea, J.), rendered [191]*191April 1, 1992, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 6 years to life imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to the plea allocution is not preserved as a matter of law since he failed to move to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction (People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665). Were we to reach the claim in the interest of justice, we would find it to be without merit. There is no “uniform mandatory catechism of pleading defendants”, only that it be demonstrable that the plea was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent (People v Nixon, 21 NY2d 338, 353, cert denied sub nom. Robinson v New York, 393 US 1067), which is shown by a review of the minutes herein. “The fact that defendant did not recite all the elements of the crime did not render the plea invalid” (People v Galvan, 197 AD2d 394, 395). Concur— Murphy, P. J., Ellerin, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Felice K. Shea, J.), rendered [191]*191April 1, 1992, convicting defendant, upon his guilty plea, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 6 years to life imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to the plea allocution is not preserved as a matter of law since he failed to move to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction (People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665). Were we to reach the claim in the interest of justice, we would find it to be without merit. There is no “uniform mandatory catechism of pleading defendants”, only that it be demonstrable that the plea was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent (People v Nixon, 21 NY2d 338, 353, cert denied sub nom. Robinson v New York, 393 US 1067), which is shown by a review of the minutes herein. “The fact that defendant did not recite all the elements of the crime did not render the plea invalid” (People v Galvan, 197 AD2d 394, 395). Concur— Murphy, P. J., Ellerin, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 190, 608 N.Y.S.2d 426, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-reyes-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack