People v. Wilson

283 A.D.2d 998, 724 N.Y.S.2d 922, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4578
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Wilson. Read the opinion of the Court — 252 A.D.2d 241

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that County Court erred in accepting his guilty plea to two counts of a 14-count indictment without conducting a sufficient factual colloquy with respect to each element of those counts. Because defendant failed to move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, he failed to preserve that contention for our review (see, People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665; People v Ayala, 226 AD2d 1127, lv denied 88 NY2d 964). Defendant’s recitation of the facts underlying the crimes did not cast significant doubt upon defendant’s guilt and thus did not bring this case within the narrow exception to the preservation doctrine (see, People v Lopez, supra, at 666; People v Ayala, supra, at 1128). (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Henry, Jr., J. — Robbery, 1st Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Burns, JJ.

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

People v. Wilson, 283 A.D.2d 998, 724 N.Y.S.2d 922, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4578 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

283 A.D.2d 998 (People v. Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Lopez
525 N.E.2d 5 (New York Court of Appeals, 1988)
People v. Ayala
226 A.D.2d 1127 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)