THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. CHARLES ALLEN ALSO KNOWN AS CJ DEFENDANT APPELLANT (2017)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. CHARLES J. ALLEN, ALSO KNOWN AS CJ, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.

KA 16–01241

Decided: June 09, 2017

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, DEJOSEPH, TROUTMAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

CHARLES A. MARANGOLA, MORAVIA, FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. JON E. BUDELMANN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AUBURN (BRIAN T. LEEDS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

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

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of burglary in the third degree (Penal Law § 140.20), tampering with physical evidence (§ 215.40[2] ), and conspiracy in the fourth degree (§ 105.10 [1] ), defendant contends that his plea was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent based on County Court's failure to inform him of certain constitutional due process rights before eliciting his factual admissions. However, “defendant failed to preserve his contention for our review by failing to move to withdraw his guilty plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction on that ground” (People v. Wilson, 115 AD3d 1229, 1229, lv denied 23 NY3d 969; see People v. Williams, 27 NY3d 212, 221–222). Contrary to defendant's further contention, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court

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Out of date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