People v. Telfair

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Telfair

2016 NY Slip Op 7225, 144 A.D.3d 709, 39 N.Y.S.3d 839

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

DecidedNovember 2, 2016

Docket2015-00497

StatusPublished

This text of 2016 NY Slip Op 7225 (People v. Telfair) 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. Telfair, 2016 NY Slip Op 7225, 144 A.D.3d 709, 39 N.Y.S.3d 839 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Molea, J.), rendered December 5, 2014, convicting her of murder in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

*710 Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that her plea of guilty was not knowingly or voluntarily entered is unpreserved for appellate review because she did not move to vacate her plea or otherwise raise this issue before the Supreme Court (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Jackson, 114 AD3d 807 [2014]; People v Folger, 110 AD3d 736 [2013]; People v Smith, 43 AD3d 474, 475 [2007]). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here because the plea allocution did not cast significant doubt on the defendant’s guilt, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntariness of her plea (see People v Davis, 24 NY3d 1012, 1013 [2014]; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]). In any event, the record establishes that the defendant’s plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see People v Seeber, 4 NY3d 780, 781 [2005]; People v Anlyan, 142 AD3d 670, 671 [2016]).

Dillon, J.P., Hall, Sgroi, Miller and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Molea, J.), rendered December 5, 2014, convicting her of murder in the second degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

*710 Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that her plea of guilty was not knowingly or voluntarily entered is unpreserved for appellate review because she did not move to vacate her plea or otherwise raise this issue before the Supreme Court (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Jackson, 114 AD3d 807 [2014]; People v Folger, 110 AD3d 736 [2013]; People v Smith, 43 AD3d 474, 475 [2007]). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the exception to the preservation requirement does not apply here because the plea allocution did not cast significant doubt on the defendant’s guilt, negate an essential element of the crime, or call into question the voluntariness of her plea (see People v Davis, 24 NY3d 1012, 1013 [2014]; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]). In any event, the record establishes that the defendant’s plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered (see People v Seeber, 4 NY3d 780, 781 [2005]; People v Anlyan, 142 AD3d 670, 671 [2016]).

Dillon, J.P., Hall, Sgroi, Miller and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2016 NY Slip Op 7225, 144 A.D.3d 709, 39 N.Y.S.3d 839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-telfair-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack