From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rouse

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 4, 1996
227 A.D.2d 1009 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 4, 1996

Not published with other Third Department decisions of April 4, 1996.

Appeal from the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.).


In satisfaction of a six-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. He seeks reversal of the judgment of conviction on the basis that the plea allocution was inadequate because the record does not indicate that defendant committed the criminal acts in Schenectady County. Insofar as defendant failed to make a motion before County Court to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction, he has failed to preserve his claim for review ( see, People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665). Under the facts presented, we do not find that defendant's plea allocution falls within the exception to the preservation requirement ( see, supra, at 666). We further find, upon reviewing the record, that the plea was knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily made. Accordingly, we decline to disturb County Court's judgment.

Cardona, P.J., Mikoll, White, Casey and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Rouse

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 4, 1996
227 A.D.2d 1009 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Rouse

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. STACEY ROUSE, Appellant

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

Date published: Apr 4, 1996

Citations

227 A.D.2d 1009 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
640 N.Y.S.2d 821

Citing Cases

People v. Mendez

However, by failing to move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant has…