PEOPLE v. RIVERA (2008)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Juan L. RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant.

Decided: February 01, 2008

PRESENT: MARTOCHE, J.P., CENTRA, LUNN, GREEN, AND GORSKI, JJ.

John E. Tyo, Shortsville, for Defendant-Appellant. R. Michael Tantillo, District Attorney, Canandaigua (James B. Ritts of Counsel), for Respondent.

On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a plea of guilty of, inter alia, burglary in the second degree (Penal Law § 140.25[2] ), defendant contends that County Court erred in accepting his Alford plea because the evidence that the People intended to offer at trial, placed on the record by the People, was inadequate to support the “intent to commit a crime therein” element of burglary (§ 140.25; see generally People v. Lewis, 5 N.Y.3d 546, 551-552, 807 N.Y.S.2d 1, 840 N.E.2d 1014). By failing to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Burgos, 291 A.D.2d 904, 738 N.Y.S.2d 268, lv. denied 97 N.Y.2d 751, 742 N.Y.S.2d 611, 769 N.E.2d 357), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15[6][a] ).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network