From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Murray

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Aug 12, 2020
186 A.D.3d 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)

Opinion

2018–13106 Ind. No. 17–00491

08-12-2020

The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Michael G. MURRAY, Appellant.

Philip H. Schnabel, Chester, NY, for appellant. David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Middletown, N.Y. (William C. Ghee of counsel), for respondent.


Philip H. Schnabel, Chester, NY, for appellant.

David M. Hoovler, District Attorney, Middletown, N.Y. (William C. Ghee of counsel), for respondent.

ALAN D. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., WILLIAM F. MASTRO, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Robert H. Freehill, J.), rendered October 4, 2018, convicting him of attempted robbery in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of his plea of guilty is not preserved for appellate review, as he failed to move to withdraw the plea or otherwise object to it prior to the imposition of sentence (see People v. Williams , 27 N.Y.3d 212, 214, 32 N.Y.S.3d 17, 51 N.E.3d 528 ; People v. Henriquez , 168 A.D.3d 876, 876–877, 89 N.Y.S.3d 912 ). In any event, the record reflects that the plea of guilty was entered into voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently (see People v. Haffiz , 19 N.Y.3d 883, 884–885, 951 N.Y.S.2d 690, 976 N.E.2d 216 ; People v. Kovalsky , 166 A.D.3d 900, 901, 85 N.Y.S.3d 889 ).

The defendant's contention that the County Court should have ordered a hearing pursuant to CPL article 730 to determine his competency is without merit. During the plea proceedings, the defendant assured the court that he did not suffer from any physical or mental condition which could affect his ability to understand and participate in the proceedings, and his responses to the court's inquires during the plea allocution did not suggest any lack of mental capacity (see People v. Pelaez , 100 A.D.3d 803, 804, 954 N.Y.S.2d 554 ; People v. Johnson , 87 A.D.3d 1074, 929 N.Y.S.2d 756 ; People v. Hansen , 269 A.D.2d 467, 467–468, 704 N.Y.S.2d 269 ).

SCHEINKMAN, P.J., MASTRO, CHRISTOPHER and WOOTEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Murray

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Aug 12, 2020
186 A.D.3d 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
Case details for

People v. Murray

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Michael G. Murray…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Aug 12, 2020

Citations

186 A.D.3d 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
186 A.D.3d 625
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 4492

Citing Cases

People v. Stinson

Nevertheless, the defendant's challenge to the County Court's Sandoval ruling (seePeople v. Sandoval , 34…

People v. Rodriguez

On appeal, the defendant contends that his plea of guilty was not knowingly, intelligently, or voluntarily…