People v. Thompson
110 A.D.2d 728
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Thompson. Read the opinion of the Court — 97 A.D.2d 554 →
Opinion
The defendant’s present challenge to the sufficiency of his allocutions at the time he entered his pleas of guilty was not preserved for appellate review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636). In any event, we find the plea allocutions to be satisfactory (People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9). [729]*729Moreover, the sentences imposed were lawful and appropriate and accordingly will not be disturbed (People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Thompson and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Thompson, 110 A.D.2d 728 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).
110 A.D.2d 728 (People v. Thompson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Pellegrino
454 N.E.2d 938 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Harris
459 N.E.2d 170 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)