Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Simon TSE, a/k/a Sam Yu, etc., Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Cohen, J., at plea; Rosalyn Richter, J., at plea withdrawal motion and sentence), rendered October 20, 1997, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of possession of a stolen motor vehicle in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 426, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 11/212 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.
After conducting a thorough hearing, the sentencing court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The record supports the court's rejection, as unreliable, of the purportedly exculpatory evidence presented by defendant in support of his assertion of innocence. Moreover, even if defendant acquired original possession of the vehicle in question lawfully, he ultimately converted the vehicle to his own use (see, Penal Law §§ 155.05[1], 155.00[3], [4]; People v. Kirnon, 39 A.D.2d 666, 667, 332 N.Y.S.2d 74, affd. 31 N.Y.2d 877, 340 N.Y.S.2d 183, 292 N.E.2d 319).
Defendant's claim that his factual allocution was rendered insufficient by the plea court's use of a compound question was not specifically raised before the sentencing court nor was it specifically ruled upon by that court. Accordingly, this claim is unpreserved (see, People v. Toxey, 86 N.Y.2d 725, 631 N.Y.S.2d 119, 655 N.E.2d 160), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would conclude that defendant's admission of all the elements of the crime may be reasonably inferred from his factual recitations (see, People v. McGowen, 42 N.Y.2d 905, 397 N.Y.S.2d 993, 366 N.E.2d 1347), and that nothing in the allocution casts doubt on his guilt. We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 25, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)