From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Maddy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 8, 1985
110 A.D.2d 719 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

April 8, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Felig, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

Defendant contends that he should be relieved of his guilty plea because the court failed to advise him that, were his case to go to trial, the People would be required to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to a unanimous jury ( see, Boykin v Alabama, 395 U.S. 238). However, by failing to make application to the court of first instance to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction, the defendant has not preserved this issue for appellate review ( People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636; People v. Mattocks, 100 A.D.2d 944; People v. Ortiz, 105 A.D.2d 760). Review in the interest of justice is not warranted. Defendant also argues that the court erred in failing to suppress a tape recording of an emergency 911 telephone call which defendant had made to police prior to his arrest. This argument is beyond the scope of our review. Defendant's counsel refused an opportunity to move to suppress that tape. Since defendant made no application for the relief now sought, there is no ruling which we can review ( see, People v. Jordan, 62 N.Y.2d 825, 826).

Finally, in view of the circumstances of this case, we see no reason to disturb the sentence imposed. Titone, J.P., Bracken, Rubin and Lawrence, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Maddy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 8, 1985
110 A.D.2d 719 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

People v. Maddy

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RUSTUM MADDY, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 8, 1985

Citations

110 A.D.2d 719 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

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…