People v. Stone

91 A.D.3d 977, 937 N.Y.2d 630
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 31, 2012·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

The defendant’s challenge to the factual sufficiency of his plea allocution is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725, 726 [1995]). Moreover, the “rare case” exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here because the defendant’s allocution did not cast significant doubt on his guilt, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntariness of his plea (People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]; see People v Young, 88 AD3d 918 [2011]). In any event, the facts admitted by the defendant during his plea allocution were sufficient to support his plea of guilty (see People v Goldstein, 12 NY3d 295, 301 [2009]; People v Seeber, 4 NY3d 780, 781 [2005]; People v Fooks, 21 NY2d 338, 350 [1967], cert denied sub nom. Robinson v New York, 393 US 1067 [1969]). Angiolillo, J.E, Florio, Leventhal and Lott, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Stone, 91 A.D.3d 977, 937 N.Y.2d 630 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

91 A.D.3d 977 (People v. Stone) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Wright
217 A.D.3d 885 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People v. Marinos
176 N.Y.S.3d 316 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Blanco
2019 NY Slip Op 6786 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Peralta
2019 NY Slip Op 2723 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
People v. Ramos
2018 NY Slip Op 5945 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
People v. Wilson
111 A.D.3d 969 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Barrett
105 A.D.3d 862 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)