From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Thoreck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 21, 2003
303 A.D.2d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

KA 02-02351

March 21, 2003.

Appeal from a judgment of Onondaga County Court (Fahey, J.), entered October 2, 2000, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of burglary in the first degree.

JAMES R. McGRAW, SYRACUSE, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (VICTORIA M. WHITE OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, SCUDDER, BURNS, AND GORSKI, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of burglary in the first degree (Penal Law § 140.30). Defendant failed to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction and thus has failed to preserve for our review his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665). Contrary to the contention of defendant, his recitation of the facts underlying the crime to which he pleaded guilty does not "clearly cast significant doubt upon [his] guilt or otherwise call into question the voluntariness of the plea" (id. at 666), and thus his "plea allocution does not qualify for the narrow, `rare case' exception to the preservation doctrine described in [Lopez]" (People v. Toxey, 86 N.Y.2d 725, 726, rearg denied 86 N.Y.2d 839).


Summaries of

People v. Thoreck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 21, 2003
303 A.D.2d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Thoreck

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. MICHAEL J…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 21, 2003

Citations

303 A.D.2d 982 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
755 N.Y.S.2d 918

Citing Cases

State v. Hayes

The challenge by defendant in appeal No. 2 to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution is encompassed…

People v. Seitz

The general rule is that to preserve a challenge to the factual sufficiency of a plea, there must either be a…