From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Triscari

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 29, 1995
219 A.D.2d 859 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

September 29, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Doyle, J.

Present — Denman, P.J. Lawton, Doerr, Balio and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The record does not support the argument of defendant that his plea of guilty was coerced by the need to seek medical treatment. When defendant indicated that he felt forced into taking a plea by his need for medical treatment, Supreme Court discontinued the proceedings and stated that it would not accept a plea on that basis. Defendant was allowed to confer with his attorney, and only then admitted to the factual allegations underlying the charges. The record supports the conclusion that the plea was knowing, intelligent and voluntary (see, People v Creech, 183 A.D.2d 1079, 1080; People v Rodriguez, 182 A.D.2d 497, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1053; cf., People v Greeman, 194 A.D.2d 397, 398, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 719).


Summaries of

People v. Triscari

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 29, 1995
219 A.D.2d 859 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

People v. Triscari

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. GERLANDO PETER…

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

Date published: Sep 29, 1995

Citations

219 A.D.2d 859 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
632 N.Y.S.2d 46

Citing Cases

People v. Neithardt

row exception to the preservation requirement,” defendant argues that the exception is implicated due to a…