People v. Torline

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Torline

294 A.D.2d 119, 740 N.Y.S.2d 874, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4310

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

DecidedMay 2, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.D.2d 119 (People v. Torline) 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. Torline, 294 A.D.2d 119, 740 N.Y.S.2d 874, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4310 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Felice Shea, J.), rendered April 30, 1999, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of four years, unanimously affirmed.

[120]*120To the extent that defendant is asserting that his plea allocution was insufficient to establish his guilt of assault in the second degree, that claim is unpreserved (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that defendant pleaded guilty knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily, and that nothing in defendant’s recitation of the facts cast any doubt upon his guilt or raised the possibility of a defense (see, People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725).

We perceive no basis for a reduction of sentence. Concur— Andrias, J.P., Sullivan, Wallach, Rubin and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Felice Shea, J.), rendered April 30, 1999, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of four years, unanimously affirmed.

[120]*120To the extent that defendant is asserting that his plea allocution was insufficient to establish his guilt of assault in the second degree, that claim is unpreserved (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that defendant pleaded guilty knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily, and that nothing in defendant’s recitation of the facts cast any doubt upon his guilt or raised the possibility of a defense (see, People v Toxey, 86 NY2d 725).

We perceive no basis for a reduction of sentence. Concur— Andrias, J.P., Sullivan, Wallach, Rubin and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 119, 740 N.Y.S.2d 874, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4310, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-torline-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack