From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Reyes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 12, 2007
41 A.D.3d 620 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 2005-05920.

June 12, 2007.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Ohlig, J.), rendered July 8, 2004, convicting him of grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y., for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Edward A. Bannan of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mastro, J.P., Ritter, Skelos, Carni and McCarthy, JJ.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary because the court failed to specifically enumerate any of his constitutional rights is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665; People v Silent, 37 AD3d 625; People v Wright, 34 AD3d 507; People v Watson, 19 AD3d 518), and we decline to review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.


Summaries of

People v. Reyes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 12, 2007
41 A.D.3d 620 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

People v. Reyes

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROBERT REYES, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 12, 2007

Citations

41 A.D.3d 620 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 5300
836 N.Y.S.2d 418

Citing Cases

People v. Stanislas

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowingly,…

People v. Stanislas

The defendant's contention that his plea of guilty was not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily made…