AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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
Attorney(S)
Judges

THE PEOPLE, ETC., RESPONDENT, v. ANTONIO CROWELL, APPELLANT. (IND. NO. 798/98).

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant has not preserved for appellate review his claim that his plea allocution was defective since he did not move to withdraw his plea of guilty (see, People v. Bell, 47 N.Y.2d 839; People v. Willingham, 194 A.D.2d 703). This case does not fit within the narrow exception to the preservation doctrine set forth in People v. Lopez ( 71 N.Y.2d 662) and People v. Serrano ( 15 N.Y.2d 304; see, People v. Willingham, supra). Since the plea was part of a knowing and voluntary bargain, we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to review the defendant's contention.

The defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would receive the sentence which was thereafter actually imposed. Therefore, he has no basis to now complain that the sentence was excessive (see, People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. CROWELL
(Jun 12, 2000)