From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ntiamoah

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 10, 1998
247 A.D.2d 248 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

Decided February 10, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.).


Since defendant did not move to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction, he has not preserved for appellate review his challenge to the sufficiency of the plea allocution and this case does not fall within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement set forth in People v. Lopez ( 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665). Were we to consider defendant's claim in the interest of justice, we would find it to be without merit. Defendant's homicidal intent could be readily inferred from his factual allocution (People v. McGowen, 42 N.Y.2d 905) and his statements to the Probation Department and at sentencing did not require the court to conduct a further inquiry sua sponte (see, People v. Toxey, 86 N.Y.2d 725; see also, People v. Negron, 222 A.D.2d 327, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 882).

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Ntiamoah

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 10, 1998
247 A.D.2d 248 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Ntiamoah

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JEFFREY NTIAMOAH…

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

Date published: Feb 10, 1998

Citations

247 A.D.2d 248 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
668 N.Y.S.2d 366

Citing Cases

People v. Parra

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Micki Scherer, J.). Since defendant did not move to withdraw…

People v. Goldstein

ew as a matter of law (People v. Dugger, 161 A.D.2d 283lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 855; see, People v. Negron, 222…