People v. Washington

228 A.D.2d 457, 643 N.Y.2d 415, 643 N.Y.S.2d 415, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6186
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 3, 1996·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

The defendant’s contention that his plea of guilty should not have been accepted by the court without conducting a further inquiry is unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Unlike an allocution that actually negates an essential element of the crime pleaded to, the failure of a pleading defendant to recite every element of the crime does not necessarily suggest that the plea of guilty is improvident or baseless so as to trigger a duty on the part of the court to inquire further (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666, n 2; People v Tapia, 197 AD2d 370, 371).

In light of the defendant’s valid waiver of his right to appeal, we do not review the defendant’s contentions that his oral motion to withdraw his plea should have been granted or that the court should have conducted a further inquiry into this motion (see, People v Hall, 176 AD2d 960). Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Copertino, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Washington, 228 A.D.2d 457, 643 N.Y.2d 415, 643 N.Y.S.2d 415, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6186 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

228 A.D.2d 457 (People v. Washington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Frazier
115 A.D.3d 759 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Caccavale
305 A.D.2d 695 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
People v. Beuther
236 A.D.2d 661 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)