From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Latney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 14, 2003
304 A.D.2d 674 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2000-11204

Submitted March 25, 2003.

April 14, 2003.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered August 2, 2000, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree (two counts), criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (three counts), and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (five counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Matthew Muraskin, Melville, N.Y., for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (John J. Ribeiro of counsel), for respondent.

Before: SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, HOWARD MILLER, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's claim that he did not knowingly and voluntarily enter a plea of guilty is unpreserved for appellate review since he did not move to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction in the Supreme Court (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662; People v. Dunkins, 231 A.D.2d 587; People v. Esposito, 157 A.D.2d 850; People v. Quick, 146 A.D.2d 815). In any event, the defendant's plea of guilty was knowingly and voluntarily made (see People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.

FEUERSTEIN, J.P., SMITH, H. MILLER and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Latney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 14, 2003
304 A.D.2d 674 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Latney

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. DOUGLAS LATNEY, appellant

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

Date published: Apr 14, 2003

Citations

304 A.D.2d 674 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
757 N.Y.S.2d 488

Citing Cases

People v. Ackerman

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's claim that he did not knowingly, intelligently, and…