People v. Stanislas
This text of 89 A.D.3d 1043 (People v. Stanislas) 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.
Opinion
The defendant’s contention that his plea of guilty was not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily made because the Supreme Court failed to specifically enumerate certain of his constitutional rights is unpreserved for appellate review since he did not move to withdraw his plea on that ground prior to [1044]*1044sentencing (see GPL 470.05 [2]; People v Reyes, 41 AD3d 620 [2007]; People v Watson, 19 AD3d 518 [2005]; People v Maddy, 110 AD2d 719 [1985]), and we decline to review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Chambers and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
89 A.D.3d 1043, 933 N.Y.2d 569, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-stanislas-nyappdiv-2011.