People v. White

137 A.D.2d 859, 525 N.Y.S.2d 323, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1910
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 29, 1988
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 137 A.D.2d 859 (People v. White) 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. White, 137 A.D.2d 859, 525 N.Y.S.2d 323, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1910 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Mishkin, J., at plea; Patsalos, J., at sentence), rendered August 27, 1984, convicting him of burglary in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the case is remitted to the County Court, Orange County, to hear and report in accordance herewith and the appeal is held in abeyance in the interim. The County Court, Orange County, shall file its report with all convenient speed.

At sentencing, the defendant orally moved to withdraw his guilty plea, upon the bare allegations that he was not guilty, and had entered the guilty plea under duress. The minutes of the plea indicate, to the contrary, that the defendant admitted his guilt by briefly explaining the facts of the crime, that he stated that he had not been forced or threatened into pleading guilty, and that he was doing so of his own free will after consulting with counsel. The County Court summarily denied the motion by stating that the "application is denied”. While the law favors the finality of guilty pleas and they are not to be undone lightly or at the whim of the defendant (cf., People v Francis, 38 NY2d 150; People v Nixon, 21 NY2d 338, cert denied sub nom. Robinson v New York, 393 US 1067), a court should not proceed to impose sentence over protestations of innocence without, at the very least, undertaking a "limited interrogation” of the defendant concerning his claim (People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926, 927). There was no such interrogation in this case (see, People v Gatling, 84 AD2d 539). Mangano, J. P., Kunzeman, Rubin, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Brown
2022 NY Slip Op 02917 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Kwabena
2016 NY Slip Op 8883 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
People v. John
2004 NY Slip Op 50792(U) (New York Supreme Court, Kings County, 2004)
People v. White
249 A.D.2d 496 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
People v. Priola
232 A.D.2d 506 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
People v. Andrade
190 A.D.2d 678 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. LaConte
172 A.D.2d 775 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
People v. Lockhart
167 A.D.2d 427 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Moore
165 A.D.2d 884 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Washington
156 A.D.2d 496 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
People v. Israel
148 A.D.2d 637 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
People v. Henderson
145 A.D.2d 676 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
People v. Belgrave
143 A.D.2d 103 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
137 A.D.2d 859, 525 N.Y.S.2d 323, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-white-nyappdiv-1988.