AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Advocates
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
Advocates

THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. FRANCIS CONTI, appellant.

ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the comments he made at sentencing did not call into question the voluntariness of his pleas. Therefore, the Supreme Court was not under a duty to inquire, sua sponte, into the validity of his pleas, or to offer him an opportunity to withdraw his pleas before imposing sentence (see, People v. Jackson, 273 A.D.2d 937; People v. Riley, 264 A.D.2d 689; see generally, People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662).

O'BRIEN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. CONTI
(Jul 16, 2001)