From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rosenzweig

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 30, 1985
113 A.D.2d 959 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

September 30, 1985

Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Copertino, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

Having never objected in the County Court to the adequacy of his plea allocution, defendant failed, as a matter of law, to preserve this claim for appellate review (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636; People v Santiago, 100 A.D.2d 857). A reversal in the interest of justice is not warranted, as there is no indication in the record that the plea was not knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered (see, People v Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9; People v Sprow, 104 A.D.2d 1056). Furthermore, we find that the County Court correctly held that defendant's statements made at the time of arrest would be admissible at trial. These statements were not the product of custodial interrogation, but rather were made in response to the police officers' attempt to clarify the nature of the criminal situation with which they were then confronted (see, People v Huffman, 41 N.Y.2d 29; People v Chestnut, 51 N.Y.2d 14, cert denied 449 U.S. 1018). Gibbons, J.P., Thompson, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Rosenzweig

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 30, 1985
113 A.D.2d 959 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

People v. Rosenzweig

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. IRA ROSENZWEIG…

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

Date published: Sep 30, 1985

Citations

113 A.D.2d 959 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)