From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wages

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 6, 1985
111 A.D.2d 198 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

May 6, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lombardo, J.).


Judgment affirmed.

On this appeal, the defendant contends that the court erroneously accepted his plea of guilty because he did not admit that he intended to cause physical injury. Having failed to move on this ground either to withdraw his plea prior to the imposition of sentence ( see, CPL 220.60) or to vacate the judgment pursuant to CPL 440.10, the defendant has not preserved this issue for appellate review (CPL 470.05; People v Claudio, 64 N.Y.2d 858; People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636; People v. Mattocks, 100 A.D.2d 944). Were we to review this issue in the interest of justice, vacatur would not be required. The plea was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered ( see, People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9). Moreover, the defendant pleaded guilty to "depraved indifference" assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10), which involves no intent ( see, People v. Williams, 40 A.D.2d 1023).

With regard to the defendant's contention that his sentence was harsh and excessive, we note that it was imposed in accordance with the plea agreement ( see, People v. Nelson, 104 A.D.2d 1055; People v. La Lande, 104 A.D.2d 1052), and, in any event, was the minimum allowable under the law (Penal Law § 70.02 [b], [4]). Mollen, P.J., Titone, O'Connor and Rubin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Wages

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 6, 1985
111 A.D.2d 198 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

People v. Wages

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES WAGES, Appellant

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

Date published: May 6, 1985

Citations

111 A.D.2d 198 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

People v. Tillman

While an independent basis existed for the complainant's in-court identification, reversal is still required…

People v. Harris

We further note that the defendant's contention regarding the propriety of his plea allocution is unpreserved…