People v. Sumpter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sumpter

304 A.D.2d 306, 756 N.Y.S.2d 741, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3413

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

DecidedApril 1, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 304 A.D.2d 306 (People v. Sumpter) 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. Sumpter, 304 A.D.2d 306, 756 N.Y.S.2d 741, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3413 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Micki Scherer, J.), rendered July 12, 2000, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of six counts of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to six concurrent terms of 17 years, unanimously affirmed.

The record establishes that defendant entered his guilty plea knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently. We conclude that the claimed deficiency in defendant’s factual allocution does not cast significant doubt on his guilt or on the voluntariness of his plea. The fact that the allocution suggested a potential affirmative defense does not require a different result. Therefore, the exception to the preservation requirement is not applicable (see People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725 [1995]), and we decline to review defendant’s unpreserved claim in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find no basis for reversal.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Rosenberger and Williams, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Micki Scherer, J.), rendered July 12, 2000, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of six counts of robbery in the first degree, and sentencing him to six concurrent terms of 17 years, unanimously affirmed.

The record establishes that defendant entered his guilty plea knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently. We conclude that the claimed deficiency in defendant’s factual allocution does not cast significant doubt on his guilt or on the voluntariness of his plea. The fact that the allocution suggested a potential affirmative defense does not require a different result. Therefore, the exception to the preservation requirement is not applicable (see People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725 [1995]), and we decline to review defendant’s unpreserved claim in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find no basis for reversal.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Rosenberger and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 A.D.2d 306, 756 N.Y.S.2d 741, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sumpter-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack