People v. Robidoux

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Robidoux

275 A.D.2d 980, 715 N.Y.S.2d 195, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9586

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

DecidedSeptember 29, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 980 (People v. Robidoux) 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. Robidoux, 275 A.D.2d 980, 715 N.Y.S.2d 195, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9586 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: By failing to move to withdraw his guilty plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve for our review his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665). The allocution does not cast significant doubt on defendant’s guilt or otherwise call into question the voluntariness of the plea, and thus this case does not come within the narrow exception to the preservation rule (see, People v Tuszynski, 270 AD2d 924). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Livingston County Court, Cicoria, J. — Sodomy, 3rd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Wisner, Kehoe and Balio, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: By failing to move to withdraw his guilty plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve for our review his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665). The allocution does not cast significant doubt on defendant’s guilt or otherwise call into question the voluntariness of the plea, and thus this case does not come within the narrow exception to the preservation rule (see, People v Tuszynski, 270 AD2d 924). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Livingston County Court, Cicoria, J. — Sodomy, 3rd Degree.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Wisner, Kehoe and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 980, 715 N.Y.S.2d 195, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9586, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-robidoux-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack