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, etc., respondent, v. Robert PRYOR, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Brown, J.), rendered October 3, 2002, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim that his plea of guilty should be vacated is unpreserved for appellate review since he did not move to withdraw it (see People v. Clarke, 93 N.Y.2d 904, 905, 690 N.Y.S.2d 501, 712 N.E.2d 668; People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636, 467 N.Y.S.2d 355, 454 N.E.2d 938; People v. Thomas, 262 A.D.2d 588, 589, 691 N.Y.S.2d 792). In any event, the plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made (see People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 543, 605 N.Y.S.2d 671, 626 N.E.2d 646; People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666, 529 N.Y.S.2d 465, 525 N.E.2d 5; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 17, 471 N.Y.S.2d 61, 459 N.E.2d 170). The record, on the whole, demonstrates that the plea did not result from any misunderstanding by the defendant as to his right to confront the witnesses against him. Moreover, there is no support in the record for the defendant's contention that the court induced him to enter the plea by threatening to impose a heavier sentence if he proceeded to trial (see People v. Alvarado, 193 A.D.2d 808, 598 N.Y.S.2d 997; see generally People v. Hollis, 74 A.D.2d 585, 424 N.Y.S.2d 483).
Furthermore, there is no evidence that the defendant lacked the capacity to understand the proceedings against him, or that he was unable to assist in his defense. To the contrary, the defendant's responses to the court's inquiries were appropriate and indicated that he was not incapacitated. Accordingly, the defendant's contention that the court should have, sua sponte, ordered a competency exam pursuant to CPL 730.30 is without merit (see People v. Gomez, 256 A.D.2d 356, 682 N.Y.S.2d 227; People v. Rowley, 222 A.D.2d 718, 636 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Hollis, 204 A.D.2d 569, 614 N.Y.S.2d 211; People v. Polimeda, 198 A.D.2d 242, 243, 603 N.Y.S.2d 513).
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: October 12, 2004
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)