People v. Rudge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rudge

112 A.D.3d 413, 975 N.Y.S.2d 674

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

DecidedDecember 3, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 112 A.D.3d 413 (People v. Rudge) 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. Rudge, 112 A.D.3d 413, 975 N.Y.S.2d 674 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Harold Adler, J.), rendered March 21, 2011, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of menacing in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of four months, unanimously affirmed.

Since defendant never moved to withdraw his guilty plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, his challenge to the voluntariness of his plea is unpreserved, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]). The narrow exception to the preservation rule is not applicable because nothing in the plea allocution casts doubt on defendant’s guilt (see id.). In any event, nothing in the record shows the plea was not voluntarily made or that defendant did not understand the consequences of the plea. Concur— Tom, J.P, Saxe, DeGrasse, Richter and Clark, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Harold Adler, J.), rendered March 21, 2011, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of menacing in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of four months, unanimously affirmed.

Since defendant never moved to withdraw his guilty plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, his challenge to the voluntariness of his plea is unpreserved, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]). The narrow exception to the preservation rule is not applicable because nothing in the plea allocution casts doubt on defendant’s guilt (see id.). In any event, nothing in the record shows the plea was not voluntarily made or that defendant did not understand the consequences of the plea. Concur— Tom, J.P, Saxe, DeGrasse, Richter and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 A.D.3d 413, 975 N.Y.S.2d 674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rudge-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack