AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DARLENA LOPEZ, Appellant.

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 her upon her plea of guilty of murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25). By failing to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve for our review her challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution ( see People v Gibbs, 31 AD3d 1186, lv denied 7 NY3d 867). This case does not fall within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement set forth in People v Lopez ( 71 NY2d 662, 666). Contrary to defendant's contention, "[t]he proof that the People intended to offer at trial, placed on the record by the prosecutor, contained strong evidence of defendant's guilt" ( People v Peralta, 231 AD2d 958, lv denied 90 NY2d 909). Also contrary to the contention of defendant, Supreme Court properly refused to suppress her statements to the police. The record of the suppression hearing supports the court's conclusion that defendant was not in custody when she made those statements to the investigating officers at her home, the hospital and the police department. A reasonable person in defendant's position, innocent of any crime, would not have believed that he or she was in custody when the statements were made ( see People v Yukl, 25 NY2d 585, 589, cert denied 400 US 851; People v Andrews, 13 AD3d 1143, 1144-1145).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. LOPEZ
(Apr 20, 2007)