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. RONALD WOODS, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law, the plea is vacated and the matter is remitted to Supreme Court, Erie County, for further proceedings on the indictment.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted assault in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.05[2] ). We agree with defendant that the plea is invalid based upon the factual insufficiency of the plea allocution. We note at the outset that defendant did not preserve for our review his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution by moving to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665). We conclude, however, that this case falls within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement inasmuch as defendant's response to Supreme Court's question concerning his guilt “clearly cast[ ] significant doubt upon his guilt or otherwise call[ed] into question the voluntariness of the plea,” and the court failed to conduct the requisite further inquiry to ensure that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered (id. at 666; see People v. Morehouse, 109 AD3d 1022, 1022–1023; People v. Roy, 77 AD3d 1310, 1310–1311). Defendant, moreover, never affirmatively pleaded guilty to attempted assault (see People v. Nieves, 72 A.D.2d 609, 610), nor did he admit to any conduct underlying the crime (see People v. Bellis, 78 A.D.2d 1014, 1014). We therefore reverse the conviction, vacate the plea and remit the matter to Supreme Court for further proceedings on the indictment.
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: KA 12–01947
Decided: January 02, 2015
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
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)