green
Positive treatment
Issue: crime is actually challengeNY ↗
Issue: Rodriguez hearingNY ↗
11.5 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases ·
…nothing on the face of the record calls into question the voluntariness of the plea or casts significant doubt upon defendant's guilt
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 2004 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2004
2015
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Stafford
Initially, we note that defendant's contention that his guilty plea was not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered survives his purported waiver of the right to appeal ( see People v McKay , 5 AD3d 1040, 1041 [4th Dept 2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 803 [2004]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Zimmerman
Defendant’s contention in his main brief that the court erred in failing sua sponte to inquire into his state of intoxication at the time of the commission of the crime is actually a challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution, and it is well settled that defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses that challenge (see People v Gleen, 73 AD3d 1443, 1444 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 773 [2010]; People v Grimes, 53 AD3d 1055, 1056 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 789 [2008]; People v McKay, 5 AD3d 1040, 1041 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 803 [2004]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Zimmerman
Defendant’s contention in his main brief that the court erred in failing sua sponte to inquire into his state of intoxication at the time of the commission of the crime is actually a challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution, and it is well settled that defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses that challenge (see People v Gleen, 73 AD3d 1443, 1444 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 773 [2010]; People v Grimes, 53 AD3d 1055, 1056 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 789 [2008]; People v McKay, 5 AD3d 1040, 1041 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 803 [2004]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Davis
Although the contention of defendant that his plea was not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered survives his waiver of the right to appeal, defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review by moving to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v McKay, 5 AD3d 1040, 1041 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 803 [2004]; People v DeJesus, 248 AD2d 1023 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 878 [1998]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Williams
The contention of de fendant that his plea to the possession count was not voluntarily entered also survives his waiver of the right to appeal (see id.); however, defendant failed to move to withdraw that plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, and thus failed to preserve that contention for our review (see People v McKay, 5 AD3d 1040, 1041 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 803 [2004]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Bland
Although the contention of defendant that his plea was not voluntarily, knowingly and intel ligently entered survives his waiver of the right to appeal, defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review by moving to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v McKay, 5 AD3d 1040, 1041 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 803 [2004]; DeJesus, 248 AD2d 1023 [1998]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. King
To the extent that defendant contends that his plea was not voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently entered, that contention survives his waiver of the right to appeal, but defendant failed to preserve his contention for our review by moving to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v McKay, 5 AD3d 1040, 1041 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 803 [2004]; DeJesus, 248 AD2d 1023 [1998]).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Biaselli
The waiver of the right to appeal by defendant encompasses his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution (see People v McKay, 5 AD3d 1040, 1041 [2004], lv denied 2 NY3d 803 [2004]).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
People v. Spivey
To the extent that defendant challenges the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution, his waiver of the right to appeal encompasses that contention (see People v McKay, 5 AD3d 1040, 1041 [2004]; People v Carlton, 2 AD3d 1353 [2003], lv denied 1 NY3d 625 [2004]; People v Singletary, 307 AD2d 779 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 599 [2003]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Terry Fogan
v.
Terry Fogan
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Mar 19, 2004.
Published
Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Timothy J. Drury, J.), rendered August 27, 2001. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of assault in the first degree (Penal Law § 120.10 [1]) and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (§ 265.02 [1]). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, we conclude that it is legally sufficient to support the conviction (see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.